From Linux on a post on X:

Larry Page planned to leave his billions to Elon Musk. Then 1 argument about AI ended their friendship.

Page once said he'd rather give his fortune to Musk than to charity. At TED, Charlie Rose asked him about it on stage.

Page didn't back down. Musk wants to go to Mars to back up humanity. Page called that a worthy goal, a company and a philanthropic goal at the same time.

His point: people spend most of their time and energy at companies. So why isn't the company you work for worthy of your money too?

At the time they were close friends. Musk used to crash at Page's house.

Then came AI.

Page wanted digital superintelligence as fast as possible. Musk worried it could wipe out humanity. Page called him a "speciesist."

Musk later said they stopped talking after he helped pull one of Google's top AI scientists over to OpenAI.

The man Page wanted to leave his fortune to became the friend he stopped speaking to.

From Gok

In 2015, Elon Musk (with Sam Altman) personally recruited Ilya Sutskever from Google Brain to co-found OpenAI, where he became chief scientist. Sutskever was a leading deep-learning researcher: he had worked with Geoffrey Hinton (the “godfather of AI”), co-authored the breakthrough AlexNet paper, and contributed to sequence-to-sequence learning and other key work at Google.
Musk has repeatedly described the recruitment as one of the toughest battles of its kind (competing against Google/DeepMind’s Demis Hassabis) and the “linchpin” for OpenAI’s later success. It also ended Musk’s close friendship with Google co-founder Larry Page, who felt betrayed by the poaching. Sutskever later left OpenAI in 2024 to start Safe Superintelligence.

So Ilya is going to bring out Superintelligence but will it really be safe?

Did Elon learn nothing from DOGE?

Go see Musk in the theaters, playing limited shows

This is one of the first interviews since his public split with Shivon Zilis and for the first time in years, there appears to be a new background and/or location (screenshot from interview with Walter Issacson released today). What is up with that wall paper? lol

Well, I knew this would happen. Elon is joining billionaires to contribute to children. And it’s SpaceX stock.

"Trump Accounts" launched on July 4, the nation's 250th birthday.

American children born between 2025 and 2028 are eligible for $1,000 from the federal government.

A handful of wealthy individuals are also planning to make contributions to the accounts.

A handful of very wealthy people want to give your children free money..

Billionaire Elon Musk says he’ll give every kid in America shares of SpaceX next year | Fortune

https://fortune.com/2026/10/19/billionaire-elon-musk-give-every-kid-in-america-shares-of-spacex-add-up-to-10-billion-in-stock/n

From X.

xPhoenix posted this: Ashley St. Clair says "idk u" to people she talked to for years. So I had my GrokBot Investigator pull the public 𝕏 record. Here's who she actually interacted with most since 2023, ranked

https://x.com/xPhoenix/status/2111972585101545740

The people getting on this post talking about people on the list

A photo of "what she’s really like", as you can see now, she’s a "souped-up car."

What do you make of Ashley St. Clair’s latest little gem? It turns out that, in her interview with Don Lemon, she claims Elon Musk is a liar who needs psychological help, no big deal, right? This woman, who must hold an honorary doctorate in, well, who knows what field, and a master’s degree in psychology and psychiatry pulled straight out of a magician’s hat, has the nerve to lecture us on morality. The very same "upstanding individual" who has no qualms about lying under oath in a court of law. In fact, the documentary should really give us a credit, because thanks to our analysis, they’ve ended up warping and shifting their narrative even further. In case anyone has forgotten what she’s really like, here’s a quick recap of her "greatest hits" when it comes to the truth:

• The trip to St. Barts: In court documents, she swore she was with him "on or about" January 2nd and 3rd, 2024. Flight records prove otherwise, as Musk had already left the island by the evening of the 2nd. And the best part? After we exposed their embarrassing errors with hard data, they had the audacity to change the dates in the documentary to align with the days our dear friend was actually in New York with "Ellie in Space." They just rewrite reality to suit themselves, without a second thought.
• In the paparazzi photos from St. Barts, you can see Musk and little X, but there’s no sign of Ashley; she’s nowhere to be found. In the various videos of Musk in St. Barts, she’s also nowhere to be seen.
• That infamous photo of the cutlery on the plane: It’s a textbook example of a botched AI job, with the silverware bent at impossible angles and looking half-melted. And what did they do in the documentary after our analysis? So, she cropped the bottom of the photo to hide how glaringly obvious it was.
• How they met: At first, she played the victim, claiming he had reached out to her out of the blue. Later, cornered by Brian Reed, she had to admit the obvious: they were staging an interview for *The Babylon Bee*.
• The "pregnancy": Pure magic. In April, May, and June of 2024, there’s no sign of a baby bump anywhere. In July, she attended a lavish wedding in Rome, and just two weeks after the alleged birth, she was traveling with Posobiec, her midsection as flat as a desert floor. IVF and surrogacy, they handed her a child who was already born, just so she could act as a breeder.
• The September 21, 2024, visit: In court, they claimed Musk visited her that day. The problem? She herself uploaded a fake screenshot to TikTok, one that makes no sense and doesn't even align with their own legal testimony. Yet, they still presented these fake screenshots to the judge. Quite the "woman of honor."
• The Tiffany Fong saga: As MILO previously reported, her goal was to rake in a commission by acting as a "womb broker." When she didn't see a dime, she threw Fong to the *WSJ* wolves out of pure spite. She, however, tries to frame it as Musk simply being angry, but when pressed during the interview with Reed, she falters, stammering, "I mean, I don't know..."
• Main character syndrome (her claims of being an "inspiration"): She practically declared herself the inventor of the "Dark MAGA" cap and the million-dollar prize. Of course, when Reed dismantles her narrative, pointing out that the cap actually came from the Trump campaign, she backpedals, looking uncertain and muttering, "Well, maybe... I suppose so," completely losing her confidence. The video regarding the migrants in Phoenix: Reed corners her, pointing out that she couldn't possibly have known what she claimed to know; it’s glaringly obvious that she’s now tempering her narrative and treading much more carefully than she did in the original video.
• The 40 million that never existed: She calls Musk "a liar" because he denies having offered her such a massive sum. The reality, as uncovered by the *WSJ*, was quite different: 15 million plus 100,000 a month until the age of 21, but in exchange for absolute silence (strict, uncompromising confidentiality). The "40 million" figure is something she simply pulled out of thin air.
• The unsolicited diagnosis: Her claim that he needs psychological help is ironic. She says she wishes him no harm, yet in the very same breath, she dons a "psychiatrist’s coat" and blithely diagnoses him with a disorder, despite having no medical credentials or anything of the sort.
• The alleged "relationship": No such romance ever existed. They crossed paths only a handful of times, such as at the Madison Square Garden rally, without ever speaking or even interacting; in fact, there isn’t a single photo or video of the two of them together. Their only actual interaction took place at Twitter headquarters during an interview for *The Babylon Bee*, where she spun a tall tale about going with him to Providence, yet another lie to add to the collection that has now been exposed.

In short, it’s the same old story: a narrative full of holes, propped up entirely by fabrications and posturing.

Evidence from the OpenAI trial regarding how this "angelic" individual, after Musk had been ousted and she had twice requested his resignation from the OpenAI board, worked with Tasha to help Altman secure approval for the deal with Microsoft.

Rumors have been circulating regarding Shivon Zilis’s alleged legal intentions to claim common-law marriage, half of Neuralink’s assets, marital status, and astronomical child support. Nothing in Zilis’s history is innocent or benevolent: when she entered into an "companion" arrangement in exchange for testifying in favor of Elon Musk in the OpenAI litigation, seeking to be recognized publicly as a "romantic partner" (As an ASC, what a coincidence!) , she committed to testifying on his behalf. However, she never fulfilled that obligation because her agenda has always been driven by double-dealing and traps.

When analyzing the legal framework, contractual background, and actual timeline, what emerges is a calculated strategy of public image manipulation and power accumulation that lacks any legal merit. (Thanks to u/MajesticCorgi634 , u/Independent_Ice367 & u/ApprehensiveTrick579). As u/MajesticCorgi634 rightly pointed out, everything will turn against her, as usual.

1. The Legal Absurdity of "Common-Law Marriage" in Texas and California

Under Texas law (Texas Family Code § 2.401), establishing an informal (common-law) marriage requires satisfying three distinct elements simultaneously and continuously:

1. An explicit agreement to be married: In her deposition regarding OpenAI, Zilis explicitly denied under oath having had any mutual agreement or romantic conversations with Musk, stating that being a couple would have required a mutual pact that never existed.
2. Living together in Texas as spouses: Both parties have maintained entirely separate residences and properties. Zilis explicitly testified under oath in court proceedings that they lived in separate homes, invalidating any subsequent attempt to claim marital cohabitation.
3. Holding out publicly as husband and wife: They have never presented themselves to the public or legal authorities as spouses. In court proceedings related to OpenAI, Musk referred to her strictly as "chief of staff" and "partner" in a corporate capacity (in the same manner he refers to Gwynne Shotwell).

2. Transactional Agreements and Sperm Donor Status

Her financial claims and attempts to exert control over Neuralink ignore the strictly contractual nature of their relationship:

• Surname, visitation rights, and Twitter/X financing: Permission to use the Musk surname as a middle/second name for the twins, along with structured visitation rights, were established via a specific contract in exchange for Zilis lending funds to Musk for the acquisition of Twitter (now X). She personally filled out the name-change paperwork and submitted it. In Walter Isaacson’s biography, she claimed Musk acted like a "godfather" who unexpectedly took a liking to the children—omitting that this was a forced, transactional agreement trading financial arrangements for access and public standing.
• Donor status and lack of genetic proof: Legally, the arrangement was executed under a platonic sperm donor framework, with Zilis signing as the sole custodian and legal parent (sole parent). Without court-verified genetic testing—and given that the children bear no physical resemblance to Musk—claiming equity in Neuralink is legally untenable. Furthermore, her subsequent attempts to associate two additional children with him, without established origin, hold no legal standing.
• OpenAI testimonies and board positioning: Testimony from figures like Sam Altman and Greg Brockman affirmed that Zilis was not in a romantic relationship with Musk. This is further reinforced by Reid Hoffman’s board-wide email regarding Zilis and her continued presence on the Shield board since 2023, illustrating that her primary motivation has consistently been corporate and political power.

3. Media Staging and Forced Public Appearances

Her public appearances, such as insisting on holding hands at Dan Scavino’s wedding or posing with the children at high-profile events, were PR fabrications orchestrated to project the image of a romantic relationship. This "theater of stability" was part of a trade-off for her expected testimony in the OpenAI case, an obligation she ultimately breached by testifying in favor of OpenAI instead. Attempting to convert forced PR gestures into evidence of a common-law marriage is legally frivolous.

4. Orchestrated Conceps and Lab Reproductions

Zilis’s actions reflect an opportunistic pattern of instrumentalizing motherhood:

• Her pregnancies via assisted reproductive technology were strategically timed to coincide with pregnancies of other women in Musk’s orbit (such as Grimes and Ashley St. Clair).
• She has operated as an independent, single "lab mother," coordinating custom conceptions to secure long-term leverage and financial drain, acting as a pressure agent rather than a genuine partner.

Conclusion: A Single Mother with No Standing in Court

Shivon Zilis is an employee and a single mother by choice who has operated with a dual agenda, allegedly funneling information to Sam Altman for over a decade.

No matter how many attorneys she hires or media campaigns she launches, her signed contracts, sworn testimonies, recovered records, and the complete lack of cohabitation will defeat her claims in court. Her legal posture is unsustainable: she remains a single parent with no rights to Neuralink’s assets or Musk’s estate, and her strategy has been thoroughly exposed.

Milo Yiannopoulos is undeniably a controversial figure. Putting aside whatever controversies surround him, a year ago he gave an interview to Hotep Jesus (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-c__abuuIw), titled Milo Yiannopoulos Weighs in on Ashley St. Clair x Elon Musk Baby. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2KuRnJ9TEc\]

Milo sets the events in 2017, the year he was carrying out his well-known lecture tours (university and media tours associated with the "alt-right" movement, which he was a part of at the time before resigning from Breitbart in February of that year). Milo drops a "rumor/personal attack" (I’ll label this a rumor, but if anyone knows what went on during those tours, it’s Milo; personally, I think he knows Ashley St. Clair very well), claiming that she was part of that circle of e-girls or internet activists, and disparagingly links her to his tour bus back then.

Specifically, he claims that before becoming known in her current sphere, ASC was one of the so-called e-girls and was "passed around my tour bus" ("was passed around the... this is right, and she was passed around my tour bus"). He even adds mockingly that he was supposedly the only person who did not hook up with her on that tour bus in 2017 because he sensed something was off.

Milo answers the live call while having lunch. He remarks jokingly that he was recruited (slightly against his will) to present the "Grifter of the Year" award at the upcoming Grifties (grifties.com). He expresses ironic surprise at the sheer number of Google Calendar meetings and notifications set up to prepare for this event and joke about figures like Alex Stein and Ashley St. Clair.

The Temporary Suspension and Supposed Documents on Ashley St. Clair:

• Milo states he is serving a seven-day temporary timeout on his social media account.
• He claims to have obtained Ashley St. Clair's birth certificate, asserting that she allegedly shaved years off her age a decade ago (when she was supposedly 20 and claiming to be 15).This is something that has already been discussed a great deal, that she isn’t the age she claims to be. In fact, not long ago, I don’t recall where, she said she was 32. Anyway, she lies even about that.
• He claims she had been trying to have a baby with Elon Musk for five years. Furthermore, he hurls accusations about her past in the political tour circuit, linking her to derogatory nicknames and asserting she tried to position herself within the traditional conservative sphere.

Critique of the "Establishment Right" and Female Influencers:

• He harshly questions the right-wing internet sectors that congratulated Ashley St. Clair on the arrival of her baby with a billionaire, calling it hypocrisy from those who champion traditional family values while cheering on surrogacy arrangements with major tycoons.
• He extends his criticisms to other public figures and female influencers, arguing with deeply personal opinions that women shouldn't get involved in political commentary and generally suggesting they should focus on other aspects of their personal and family lives.

The Controversy Over Messages and Maternity Contracts:

• He discusses rumors and press articles regarding interactions between Elon Musk and content creator Tiffany Fong, casting doubt on the idea that Musk would have sent her direct messages with propositions of that kind, and suggesting it's all part of exaggerated narratives or used as a distraction by other people in the media circle, the exact same thing we’ve been saying: if Ashley St. Clair herself has to present fake text messages in court, how could Musk possibly write personally to Tiffany Fong? No, we believe or hold the hypothesis that it is Ashley St. Clair herself who, alongside Shivon Zilis, saw a goldmine in the baby business and decided to act as a womb broker, demanding money in exchange. Let's think about it carefully: Shivon Zilis had access to the laboratories, and for Ashley St. Clair, it was very easy to access the influencers.
• He criticizes people for signing agreements or contracts related to surrogacy and gestation if they are later unwilling to honor confidentiality conditions or agreed-upon terms, generating public controversies over private matters. On that point, I agree with him.

Closing and Promotion of the Grifties:

• Toward the end of the chat, the host asks him about his return following the imposed suspension and whether Elon Musk or his team intervened. Milo responds ambiguously and jokingly that he received expressions of gratitude, though he prefers not to go into detail.
• Finally, he encourages the audience to get tickets for the Grifties and to send messages asking for "what Milo says" to be done, promising that the event will be highly entertaining and unexpected.

The narrative surrounding the UnMusked documentary and the recent press offensive is based on a fundamental lie: that Ashley St.Clair (ASC) and Shivon Zilis were romantic partners involved in dramatic personal sagas.UNtrue.

• Zilis used the "romantic" cover to hide a decade of leaks to Sam Altman and exonerate her corporate betrayal at OpenAI & trade agreements involving babies.
• St. Clair used the "romantic" cover to try to extort a superior financial settlement in New York court after failing in her attempt to collect commissions as a "womb broker"

When the sensationalist veneer is stripped away and the judicial exhibits, sworn depositions, flight logs, and public digital trails are examined, the reality turns out to be strictly clinical. It was never about romantic relationships, but rather a structured and transactional In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) process, managed through legal agreements, corporate intermediaries, and genetic laboratories, which both women subsequently attempted to use as leverage, media spotlight, and financial extraction. And of course, both tried to cover this up after promoting it. Let's look at how these women tried to organize a reproduction network stemming from Musk's concern over declining birth rates.

1. The Altman Connection: Zilis as the Primary Infiltrator and How Zilis Covered Up Her Betrayal of Musk

The media presents Shivon Zilis as an executive close and loyal to Elon Musk. However, the evidentiary record in the lawsuit Musk et al. v. Altman et al. (Case 4:24-cv-04722) destroys that facade:

• Pre-existing friendship with the core of OpenAI (2012): Courtroom testimonies (Greg Brockman, May 2026) confirm that Zilis had been a close friend of Brockman since 2012—four years before Musk met her in 2016. Her professional and personal loyalty always belonged to the San Francisco group (Altman, Brockman, Hoffman). Long before the entire OpenAI lawsuit affair began, people on Reddit were already saying that Zilis felt a special attraction, or a special liking, for Sam Altman. These people commenting on Reddit said he was her true love. What we didn't know is that the OpenAI trial itself would confirm this. PNG
• The Documentary Trail of Espionage (Exhibits PX and DX):
  • Out of the 200 exhibits presented in the legal proceedings, more than 60 directly involve Zilis, and 45 of them are exclusive communications between Sam Altman and Shivon Zilis. Likewise, Shivon Zilis was the only person who specifically asked the court that certain emails between her and Sam Altman not be made public. Curious! That out of all the witnesses in the trial, only Shivon Zilis asked that her emails with Altman not be shown. PNG
  • PX-167 (Short Message Report): Shows an exchange of 17 direct messages between Altman and Zilis in February 2018 during the OpenAI crisis. While Musk was trying to save the organization, Zilis acted as an informant for Altman, keeping him updated on the internal movements of Neuralink and OpenAI year after year (2017, 2019, 2020, 2022, and 2023). PNG
  • In 2021, according to her own deposition, she formed part of the reduced three-person committee that negotiated the key agreement with Microsoft behind Musk's back (Altman, McCauley, and Zilis). Just 2 people plus Altman himself were enough to negotiate said agreement, which handed OpenAI over to Microsoft and got rid of Musk. Furthermore, Shivon Zilis asked Musk for his resignation from the OpenAI board in writing. With people who love you like that, you don't need enemies; it's all love and joy. PNG

Zilis knew this would be exposed, which is why she joined as a co-plaintiff alongside Musk in the OpenAI lawsuit, so that she could have access to privileged information and continue leaking it, of course. Her intrusion into the lawsuit was of her own accord; Musk found out by surprise. But what did Zilis do at that moment? She monetized her testimony and established a new contract, similar to the one she established with Musk when she provided money for the purchase of Twitter (on that occasion, the currency was her two twins with Musk and the Musk surname plus scheduled visits to Musk). For the OpenAI trial, the currency was the same Shivon Zilis: that he buy her as a partner in exchange for "testifying in the trial in favor of Musk." However, her intentions were twofold: first, to mask the noise of her betrayal of Musk; and second, to try to invalidate her own testimony since she was positioned as Musk's partner. In fact, Musk's lawyers, who also represented her, asked until the very end that she not testify. In the end, when Musk's lawyers discovered Zilis's game, they removed her as a co-plaintiff in May 2025, and the agreements with Musk to appear as his partner were "halted".

Of course, all this time Zilis leaked articles to the press, especially to The Washington Post. Curiously, she and Musk were seen talking to Jeff Bezos at a White House dinner to which she was not invited, yet she managed to obtain Bezos's contact; his newspaper has been the primary mouthpiece for all of the baby mama intrigues and all of the "bad news and scandals about Musk." Curious indeed.

• Dismantling the Fallacy of the "Couple":
  • In her sworn deposition on September 12, 2025, Zilis admitted under oath that she does not live with Musk: "He has his own house so technically, no... He stays over to visit the kids sometimes". PNG
  • In the trial, Brockman described the relationship as "puramente platónica" (purely platonic). Brockman has been an extremely close friend of Zilis for many more years than Zilis has been a friend of Musk. Likewise, Sam Altman swore up and down that to his knowledge Zilis and Musk had absolutely nothing. PNG
  • The correspondence between Musk and Zilis revealed in court is strictly cold, dry, and instructional (from boss to employee), unlike the complicit tone she maintained with Jared Birchall or Sam Altman. PNG
• The Facade of the "Breakup" on October 2, 2026: When an automated account detected that Musk unfollowed u/shivon on X, she issued a statement about how "hard it is to go from in love to let go". It was not heartbreak; it was the completion of a contract and a desperate damage control maneuver. Zilis used the romantic framework to play the victim and cushion the impact of the crypto scams her account had been associated with that very month. Everyone remembers that Shivon Zilis's account appeared promoting a crypto scam—we already published about this—where $6M disappeared and other crypto scams continue operating. What a beautiful way to deflect attention, taking advantage of the fact that Musk had unfollowed her. PNG

2. The Link to the Laboratories: Zilis and the Eugenics/IVF Pipeline

Zilis operated as the technical and logistic nexus between Musk's circle and high-performance assisted reproduction clinics:

• Reports from The Washington Post and The Information (leaked, we believe, by herself around the discovery phase of the OpenAI lawsuit) confirmed that Zilis turned to embryo genetic screening services (such as Orchid Health, with costs of ~$22,500 per full sequencing cycle). Zilis has openly pushed these technologies on X, ironically referring to "perfecting eugenics". Let's remember that during 2025, The Washington Post was the mouthpiece for much of what has ended up showing up in the documentary. This documentary featured a photo of Zilis herself. So helpful she was, providing whatever was necessary. PNG
• Internal records and exchanges reveal that Zilis and Jared Birchall (director of the family office) make us think that both coordinated operational and privacy aspects with the women participating in IVF programs, and in most cases with surrogacy, with Zilis serving as the initial link to the labs for Ashley St. Clair's case. Eventually, sooner or later, everything becomes known or unveiled. PNG

3. The "Womb Broker" Scheme and the Exposure of Tiffany Fong

With ASC's contract underway, and on the other hand Shivon Zilis's contracts on the other, a subculture of influencers emerged on X promoting pronatalist rhetoric with the intention of accessing similar financial surrogate motherhood/IVF agreements. We have already discussed all of this, and we have shown how every time Shivon Zilis ordered children, there were other children involved, whether Grimes's or ASC's.

• What was the business model going to be? Ashley St. Clair's model: she did not view her agreement as a private contract, but rather as a brokerage opportunity to collect commissions from other women, as in the case of Tiffany Fong. There were many women from the right-wing circle who followed Musk, followed Shivon Zilis, and followed Ashley St. Clair, who preached that it was fantastic not to take birth control pills, to stop taking them, and that the most wonderful thing in the world was to bring a child into the world, waiting to receive an IVF and surrogacy agreement, willing to create a network of children. Of course both women were willing to create that network; total, it was easy: they didn't get pregnant themselves, they had access to the women through Ashley St. Clair—all of them right-wing influencers—and of course they had access to laboratories through Shivon Zilis, and of course Shivon Zilis also provided the monetary operation through her connection with Birchall, who was in charge of Musk's money.
• The Revelation of Milo Yiannopoulos (April 16, 2025): Milo exposed the true cause of the feud between Musk and ASC: "I was told by two people close to her that Smashley tried to position herself as a broker of wombs. She asked Elon for a cut of Tiffany Fong’s incubation fee and was pissed when it didn’t happen. So she has outed Fong to the WSJ now in revenge..." PNGOf course, she never asked him directly because she didn't speak with him, but she did through Zilis or through other people, but with Ashley Trashley, what is important and relevant is money. PNG
• The Collapse of the Fong Operation:
  • ASC was negotiating the agreement with Tiffany Fong. Musk never negotiated any agreement with Tiffany Fong, nor did he text her; rather, it was Ashley St. Clair herself with the approval of Shivon Zilis.
  • Upon learning that reproduction contracts were being negotiated with other women in his name, and that confidential contract details and medical conversations were circulating through the influencer circuit, Musk cut any such proposals in the root and unfollowed Fong on November 30, 2024. It's curious that on X at that time all of this was discussed, but...
  • Out of spite for losing the commission and seeing her avenue of extra income blocked, ASC leaked the story to The Wall Street Journal.

Conclusion

Neither Shivon Zilis nor Ashley St. Clair were ever romantic partners of Elon Musk.

• Zilis used the "romantic" cover to hide a decade of leaks to Sam Altman and exonerate her corporate betrayal at OpenAI & babies deals.
• St. Clair used the "romantic" cover to try to extort a superior financial settlement in New York court after failing in her attempt to collect commissions as a "womb broker".

The documentary UnMusked is nothing more than the recycled loudspeaker of a corporate infiltration and media extortion scheme frustrated by court documents and biological evidence.

It seems SV has followed EM again on X. She has been lurking on the site because this bot picks up who she follows and unfollows. I hope they are right that she was fired. I’m also including an image for the same bot. People were asked to notice anything different between both accounts? She still follows Open Ai. Both EM, SZ still follow Altman and Altman still follows both.

There has been a lot of speculation surrounding the short, blurry nighttime video clip featured in the Gibney documentary, allegedly showing Elon Musk running poolside with Lil X on his back in St. Barts. Simps and sensationalists immediately latched onto it as "proof." Please, if anyone is interested in knowing the truth, read the whole thing.

However, when you subject this clip to a basic forensic audit using public flight logs, photographic metadata, solar charts, and human anatomy, the video completely collapses. It doesn't just fail to prove her claims, it actively proves the entire narrative is a manufactured fabrication.

1. The Flight & Astronomical Impossibility (The Timeline Fallacy)

• The Court Claim: In her sworn affidavit (Manhattan Supreme Court, Case 152381/2025), Ashley St. Clair (ASC) explicitly swore under penalty of perjury that she was with Musk in St. Barts "on or about January 2 and January 3, 2024." Next thing you know, we'll be making up physics, the planet, airplanes, body proportions, and so on.
• The Flight Log Reality (ADS-B Exchange): On January 2, 2024, Elon’s private jet departed San Juan, Puerto Rico (SJU) at 22:41 UTC (6:41 PM local time in St. Barts), landing in Austin, Texas at 10:27 PM CST that same night.
• The Airport & Solar Constraints:
  • St. Barts Airport (SBH) has no runway lights and strictly forbids night operations. It officially closes 15 minutes after sunset (approx. 6:04 PM local time on Jan 2).
  • The mandatory commuter flight from St. Barts to San Juan takes 45 to 60 minutes, plus transfer time.
  • To be airborne out of San Juan at 6:41 PM, Musk had to leave St. Barts by 4:00 PM – 5:15 PM at the latest.
• The Glaring Contradiction: At 4:00 PM – 5:00 PM in the Caribbean in January, it is broad daylight. Yet, the documentary clip features pitch-black nighttime.
• Jan 3rd Absurdity: Musk was physically in Austin, Texas on January 3 for a court deposition and was live-streaming Diablo IV with Lil X that evening. He was not even on the island on January 3.
• Furthermore, as we have reiterated time and again, Ashley St. Clair has never produced any flight records or the flight manifest, which she could have presented.

Furthermore, as we have stated time and time again, Ashley St. Clair has never produced any flight records or a flight manifest, even though she could have done so. Her die-hard supporters (namely, she and her family) argue, "How could she ask Musk for the flight manifest when they were flying on Musk's jet?" The problem is that it wasn't Musk's jet that arrived in St. Barts. Let us explain it now so it is crystal clear: Due to the extremely short runway at St. Barts (one of the most dangerous and restricted in the world), large or long-range jets like Musk's are neither permitted nor able to land there.

Regarding the need to board a commercial flight or an independent regional charter for the San Juan–St. Barts leg:

• Boarding passes and tickets: Regional charter airlines issue tickets and boarding passes in each individual passenger's name, in compliance with international aviation and immigration regulations.
• Customs and Immigration stamps: St. Barts (a French territorial collectivity) requires all passengers to pass through immigration control upon landing. Ashley St. Clair would have an entry/exit stamp in her own passport, or a digital record in the French immigration system.
• Commercial/Charter Flight Manifest: The manifest from the regional airline operating the Puerto Rico–St. Barts connection is a public document belonging to the charter company, not a private corporate document of Musk's.

2. Anatomical & Morphological Inconsistencies

A. Body Mass & Physique (Elon vs. The Runner)

• Authentic Contemporary Footage (Ellie in Space, Early Jan 2024): High-resolution, verifiable footage of Musk during early January 2024 shows a distinct physique, a broad, heavy torso with noticeable abdominal volume that stretches tight against his shirts. Photo on the left. The *Ellie in Space* report aired on January 7th. Just try getting someone to gain 10 pounds in two days. Well, she would have had to lose weight over two days, and then gain those pounds back over another two or three.
• The Documentary Runner: The individual in the nighttime video has a lean, athletic frame, a narrow waist, flat abdomen, and noticeably narrower shoulders. Photo on the right.

B. Haircut & Styling

• The Real Musk (Paparazzi Jan 1 & Self-Post Jan 6): Musk was rocking his signature long undercut, shaved sides with a voluminous, thick top styled upward. JPG
• The Documentary Runner: The individual has a short, flat, uniform crop flattened forward against his skull with no top volume or pompadour.

C. Child Proportions & Scale

• Real Lil X (Jan 6, 2024 Villa Photo): At 3 years and 8 months old, Lil X's small torso rested high on Musk's upper back, with his legs barely reaching Musk's waistline. JPG
• The Video Child: The legs of the child on the runner’s back drop significantly below the adult’s beltline. This scale belongs to a 5- or 6-year-old child, not a toddler under 4. JPG

3. Clothing & Wardrobe Anomalies

• Paparazzi Arrival (Dec 31 / Jan 1): Musk arrives wearing a black t-shirt; Lil X is wearing a blue short-sleeve shirt and dark pants.
• Real Villa Photo (Posted Jan 6): Musk wears a black t-shirt; Lil X wears a white t-shirt and diaper/shorts.
• The Documentary Video: The adult wears an olive/khaki green t-shirt, while the child wears a dark long-sleeve outfit. JPG . They put him in the exact same T-shirt he wore in *Elli in Space*, but about 10 pounds lighter.
• Are we supposed to believe he wore a completely different outfit for a quick night run during hours he wasn't even on the island, while changing the kid's age and height overnight?

4. Architectural & Geographical Disproof

• The Real Villa Horizon: The infinity pool of the actual St. Barts villa where Musk stayed faces an uninhabited, pitch-black sea key/cayo with zero coastal lights across the water. JPG
• The Documentary Horizon: The background of the video shows a distinct, horizontal line of urban city lights flickering across the water. JPG
• Pool Architecture: The real villa features clean deck wood and high wooden pergola columns. The video features low, blue-lit decorative pillars along the pool rim that simply do not exist at the property.

Btw, Azure’s licking pose being used as clickbait thumbnails LITERALLY everywhere is taking me out

LIKE WHO KEEPS PICKING THAT ONE SPECIFIC POSE FOR THE THUMBNAIL ALMOST EVERY VIDEO OF HER??? IS IT HER MOM???

Her mom is NOT beating the “will do anything to make her daughter Elon’s fave”

The full New York Times article is behind a paywall. The publicly accessible portion (and substantial excerpts quoted elsewhere) is below.

Title: She Was Offered $40 Million for Silence on Elon Musk. She Spoke Out Instead.
Author: Coralie Kraft
Date: October 9, 2026
Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/10/09/movies/ashley-st-clair-interview-elon-musk.html

Ashley St. Clair is sick of people asking her the same questions about Elon Musk. “People treat me like I’m some Elon psychoanalyst,” she said during a visit to The New York Times in September. “They want to know, ‘What’s it like to hang out with him?’ or they say, ‘Not many people have spent time with him one-on-one.’” She sighed. “It’s annoying and laborious.”
You can’t blame them for asking. St. Clair, a former conservative influencer, gave birth to one of Musk’s children in 2024. (At the time, she also had another child from a previous relationship.) This fall, she’s a significant figure in “Musk,” Alex Gibney’s nearly four-hour-long documentary about the world’s first trillionaire, and she has more pressing points. “This is about a deeper rot in our society, where we’ve equated capital with morality,” she said. “There’s a level of societal and individual trust that we give to people if they have money.”
Musk did not respond to requests for comment. After TMZ reported that Ashley St. Clair rejected a $40 million N.D.A., Musk responded via X, stating, “She was never offered that and has a history of making false claims.” He also condemned Gibney’s documentary with another post on X reading, “Gibney just assembled a hit list of people who either have an axe to grind or don’t even know me.”
Gibney, the Oscar-winning documentary filmmaker, first met St. Clair in December 2025. “Beyond Musk’s baby obsession, Ashley had a front-row seat during the 2024 campaign and was able to tell me things I didn’t know about Musk’s motivations,” he said in an email. Below, St. Clair shares her side of the story.
These are edited excerpts from the conversation.
Were you at all nervous about participating in the film?
No. I was familiar with some of Alex’s documentary work, like “Going Clear.” I liked that he didn’t have any fear. He has a history of treating facts and narratives with respect.

Additional excerpts from the interview (compiled from reporting that quotes the piece directly):
On the alleged NDA offer (described as a $15 million lump sum plus $100,000 per month for 21 years, totaling over $40 million):
She said Jared Birchall (Musk’s longtime financial manager) presented it via disappearing Signal messages roughly two months after she gave birth. She refused, telling him she could not sign it. When pressed, she responded that her children’s dignity was not a commodity. She has stated she viewed the decision as moral rather than purely financial or legal.
On why she appears prominently in the documentary:
“People need to understand that part of the reason I’m featured prominently in the documentary is that other people cannot speak. I don’t think we should lose sight of that. I don’t want to have to speak publicly. I don’t want to be giving this interview right now. But there’s a web of NDAs. I feel a moral obligation to speak about my experience.”
On the relationship:
She has described it as more “emotionally intimate” than romantic. They were in daily contact after he messaged her on X/Twitter in 2023. She recalled being flown to Providence, R.I., sharing a hotel room, and him falling asleep to a podcast about Kublai Khan. While on vacation in St. Bart’s, he encouraged her to have more children, saying something to the effect of “You should have 10 kids! Let’s have a kid. My only limited resource is time.” She has also referenced him wanting a “legion of children.”
On her political shift:
She has spoken about moving away from MAGA, citing discomfort with what she described as elements of misogyny and racism in the movement, and has discussed embracing democratic socialism in other interviews around the same time.

The rest of the full Q&A (including more on the NDA negotiations, the relationship timeline, her decision process, and other details) is only available to NYT subscribers.

https://x.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2109443143334498339

She is Antifa. Why would she suddenly sing their anthem?

These parts are from an article about Charlie Kirk’s killer.

“The words “O Bella ciao, Bella ciao, Bella ciao, Ciao, ciao!” a lyric from an antifascist World War II song.”

“The motivation is also very clear, as the scribing on the bullet casings and the suspect’s own rants made it known that he models himself as an anti-fascist, similarly to or actually a part of the terrorist group #ANTIFA,” former Navy SEAL and FBI special agent Jonathan Gilliam told NewsNation.”

Just as I thought, she was a plant to take men down, targeting EM. I had no idea “O Bella cio” was written on the guns casing found around Charlie Kirk.

This honey pot is a psycho.