The tech billionaires are fighting for Donald Trump’s attention. At least, that’s what it looks like.

Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, donated $1 million to the president-elect’s inaugural fund, the company confirmed to Blue Light News on Thursday. And this morning, it seemed like fellow billionaire Elon Musk has taken issue with its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg’s potential involvement in the new administration.

“Concerning,” Musk said on X, responding to a post from conservative commentator Ashley St. Clair claiming — without evidence — that Meta is “actively censoring conservatives right now.” While it’s unclear exactly what Musk was referring to, the original post St. Clair was responding to was a video of a suited up Zuckerberg wakesurfing with an American flag announcing the $1 million donation from an account titled “DogeDesigner.”

It’s not unusual for corporations to contribute to presidential inaugurations, but neither Zuckerberg nor Meta donated to Trump’s inaugural fund in 2017, or to President Biden’s fund in 2021.

The tech giant’s donation comes just weeks after Zuckerberg visited Mar-a-Lago to dine with Trump — an additional attempt from the company to mend relations with the Republican party’s MAGA wing after he banned the then-former president from the platform in 2021. Trump’s accounts have since been restored.

Trump and Zuckerberg’s fraught relationship is well documented. In Trump’s book, “Save America,” released in September, he claimed that Zuckerberg plotted against him during the 2020 election and that the Meta CEO would “spend the rest of his life in prison” if he did it again. In July, Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social that if elected, he would pursue “ELECTION FRAUDSTERS at levels never seen before, and they will be sent to prison for long periods of time. We already know who you are,” before directly addressing Zuckerberg. “DON’T DO IT! ZUCKERBUCKS, be careful!”

Meta spokesperson Andy Stone declined to comment on Musk’s post. Spokespeople for Musk via X did not immediately respond for comment.

Congressional Democrats broadly denounced the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson Friday morning, after Republicans started accusing Sen. Elizabeth Warren of excusing violence.

“No one’s condoning this,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.). “Violence never is the right answer for anything. And it was a horrible murder, a tragic loss for his family.”

Warren this week condemned the shooting, but added that people “can be pushed only so far.”

“We’ll say it over and over,” Warren said on BLN’S “The ReidOut.” “Violence is never the answer. This guy [Luigi Mangione] gets a trial who’s allegedly killed the CEO of UnitedHealth, but you can only push people so far, and then they start to take matters into their own hands.”

In a statement to Blue Light News, Warren said, “Violence is never the answer. Period. I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.” Top Republicans denounced Warren’s comments and the walked-back rhetoric, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) calling it “inappropriate and dangerous.”

Some House Democrats asked about the incident on Thursday pivoted the conversation to discuss policy options on health care or gun safety.

“I don’t really know that this is really a space that Congress normally weighs in on,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). “But at the end of the day, I think it’s an opportunity, because now people are talking about health care and to talk about the fact that this industry has honestly not been as helpful as it could be.”

“Violence is never the answer,” said Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.). “We know that there are people suffering, there’s great challenges in healthcare. There’s great challenges, and people have, in fact, been wronged, but a process of governance is the way to address that, not violence.”

And Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) who denounced the murder, said the killer should be prosecuted and that “I do know that allegedly a ghost gun was used, and we should also ban ghost guns. There’s no reason for them beyond the streets.”

The House passed legislation, largely along party lines, to expand the federal judiciary by more than 60 seats despite a veto threat from the Biden White House.

The bill — co-authored by Biden ally Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) — passed the Senate unanimously earlier this year. But Democrats have cried foul about the House taking it up post-election, once it became clear President-elect Donald Trump would have the first opportunity to fill some of the newly created positions.

“Giving [Trump] more power to appoint additional judges would be irresponsible,” said House Judiciary ranking member Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) at a Rules Committee hearing Monday.

House Democrats mounted an eleventh hour whip campaign against the legislation once the White House voiced its opposition on Tuesday. In the end, though, 29 Democrats supported it. The final tally was 236-173.

Under the legislation, the new seats would be rolled out over the course of three presidential administrations, in theory to offer both parties the possibility of filling some of the slots.

The Federal Judges Association and Federal Bar Association urged the White House to reconsider and sign the legislation upon House passage, writing, “the lack of new judgeships has contributed to profound delays in the resolution of cases and serious access to justice concerns.”