“Elon Is a Nuclear Weapon”: New Documentary Examines “10,000 Lasers” Message and DOGE Data Questions

A new documentary by Alex Gibney raises questions about billionaire Elon Musk’s influence on U.S. elections. Titled “Musk,” the film was written and directed by the Oscar-winning filmmaker. It also examines Musk’s role in DOGE, the government efficiency initiative. The documentary explores the debate, criticism and unanswered questions surrounding Musk’s political power, including a message about space-based lasers that he allegedly sent to Ashley St. Clair before the 2024 presidential election.

St. Clair, who appears in the film, said Musk messaged her shortly before Election Day. According to her, Musk said he was “feeling optimistic” and wrote, “Tomorrow we unleash the glitch in the matrix.” When she asked what he meant, Musk reportedly replied, “lasers from space,” adding, “I have over 10,000 lasers in space right now.”

The messages are striking, but they do not prove that Musk interfered in the election. Gibney said he could not determine whether Musk was exaggerating or lying. However, he believes the exchange warrants closer scrutiny.

New documentary examines “10,000 lasers” message and DOGE data

During a screening on Friday, Gibney speculated about the meaning of the messages. He said Musk may have been referring to access to information about the reporting of election results, rather than an attempt to change votes.

“If I were to speculate,” Gibney said, Musk may have had access to information earlier than others. He suggested this could have been possible through online systems connected to vote counting. People with the technical ability to access those systems might have been able to obtain real-time information, he added.

This is solely the director’s interpretation, not evidence that Musk accessed election systems or obtained confidential results. The film leaves its central question unresolved: the messages alone cannot establish what Musk intended to say.

The documentary also traces Musk’s transformation from prominent technology entrepreneur into an increasingly influential political figure. It covers his leadership at Tesla and SpaceX, as well as his promotion of self-driving technology. His views on population growth and his shift toward right-wing politics are also examined.

In the film, Gibney uses an exaggerated deepfake version of Musk—with an oversized head—to narrate some sequences. The voice appears to imitate the billionaire’s own. The character progresses through a shooting game, with increasingly powerful targets representing Musk’s expanding ambitions.

At nearly four hours, the film has room to explore Musk’s businesses, family history and public controversies in depth. Yet its most significant questions concern his access to the government and how information gathered through those connections could be used.

Access to DOGE data raises questions about Musk’s role and motives

Musk’s involvement in DOGE provides another focus for the documentary. The film presents DOGE as an effort to combat waste, fraud and abuse in government. Gibney questions whether the young DOGE employees had sufficient knowledge of the agencies they were assigned to investigate.

At Friday’s screening, the director said DOGE staff obtained “super administrator” privileges within days of entering some agencies. According to Gibney, those privileges gave them access to data across several government departments. He said that data may have included classified material and personal information.

The implications extend beyond administrative reform. Executive producer Ronan Farrow said unanswered questions remain about what happened to Americans’ sensitive information, citing Social Security numbers, telephone numbers and home addresses as examples.

Farrow alleged that such information was collected and transferred to third parties, leaving the chain of custody and ownership unclear. He also warned that personal data could have electoral consequences. The film does not establish that the information was used to influence voting.

Gibney suggested there could be a connection between access to DOGE data and artificial intelligence. He raised the question of whether information collected from government systems could be used as training material. He warned that such tools could potentially influence future elections.

That possibility is not evidence that such activity took place. Instead, the film highlights gaps in what is publicly known about the data, asking who received it and what happened to it afterward.

The film also revisits Musk’s relationship with President Donald Trump. Their political alliance became strained over Trump’s spending legislation, which was linked to a growing federal budget deficit. Musk has repeatedly made cuts to government spending a priority. Sources say the two have since moved toward reconciliation.

Meanwhile, Musk has reportedly tried to restrict promotion of the film on X and other social media platforms. Gibney said the restrictions were justified by classifying the film’s promotion as political advertising. Musk also attacked the director on X, calling him “fundamentally a despicable human being” and accusing him of bias.

According to reports, Musk’s lawyer was contacted for comment. At the time of publication, the documentary was scheduled to premiere on HBO in January. Gibney expressed doubt about whether that release would go ahead.

St. Clair offered a blunt assessment of the person at the center of the film. “Elon is a nuclear weapon,” she says. The statement is intended to make viewers consider how much influence a single technology billionaire should have over government institutions.