‘I was a good, visible target’: Jared Isaacman on why Trump pulled his NASA chief nomination

Jared Isaacman has opened up on why he believes his nomination to be NASA administrator was abruptly withdrawn by the White House.

“It was a real bummer,” Isaacman said during an appearance on the All-In Podcast on June 4, describing the moment he was told the president had “decided to go in a different direction.”

Isaacman, a billionaire tech entrepreneur and private astronaut, was sounded out for the role of NASA administrator in early December by then president-elect Donald Trump. The official process then proceeded, with Isaacman passing a committee vote in late April. By late May, a full Senate confirmation hearing was expected to come within days, for which Isaacman appeared to have broad support.

But then the White House, somewhat stunningly to the outside world, revealed publicly on May 31 that Isaacman’s nomination would be withdrawn.

“It’s essential that the next leader of NASA is in complete alignment with President Trump’s America First agenda, and a replacement will be announced directly by President Trump soon,” White House spokesperson Liz Huston said in an emailed statement. The statement did not give an overt reason for dropping the 42-year-old Isaacman.

Speaking on the All-In Podcast, Isaacman provided his first public comments on the development.

“I got a call Friday of last week that the president decided to go in a different direction,” he said. The news was “a real bummer,” Isaacman added, stating that he had been expecting a peaceful weekend.

“It was certainly disappointing. But you know, the president needs to have his person he counts on to fulfill the agenda.”

Asked about the reasons for the withdrawal, Isaacman recalled that the unnamed official who called him said only that the president had decided to go in a different direction. Isaacman added, however, that he started to get some details and had a “pretty good idea” of the rationale for the decision.

“I don’t think that the timing was much of a coincidence. There was other changes going on the same day,” he said, referring obliquely to the split between President Trump and Elon Musk, the billionaire SpaceX owner. On May 28, Musk criticized a major administration bill currently being considered by the U.S. Congress, followed by the announcement on May 29 that he will be leaving the Trump administration on May 30. (He had been a 130-day “special government employee,” leading the cost- and regulation-cutting Department of Government Efficiency.)

A sharper fallout continued and spilled over onto social media, leading, Isaacman said, to the withdrawal of his nomination.

“I read the news, same as everybody else, but I was in D.C. for the last six months getting ready… There were some people that, you know, had some axes to grind, I guess,” Isaacman said. “And I was a good, visible target.”

Asked by podcast host David Friedberg if the development was a shot at Elon, Isaacman said that “people can draw their own conclusions,” adding, “I think the direction that people are going, or are thinking on this, seems to check out to me.”

Friedberg pushed for more color on what he saw as a decision that had disappointed many, but Isaacman said only that he fully backs Trump, noting that the president has thousands of decisions to make with seconds of information.

“I don’t blame an influential advisor coming in and saying, look, here’s the facts. And I think we should kill this guy, and the president’s got to make the call and move on,” Isaacman explained.

Isaacman also dismissed the suggestion that his nomination was pulled due to his earlier funding activities. (He has donated to Democratic candidates and offices as well as Republicans.)

“That was not a new development. You just Google, and they’re all public,” he said. The matter of his bipartisan donations had been noted and discussed by observers following news of his initial nomination. He also described himself as a moderate, though “right-leaning.”

On his relationship with Musk, Isaacman said he had “only spoken to Elon a couple dozen times, most of which related to human spaceflight missions.” Isaacman has funded and commanded two groundbreaking private missions to Earth orbit, both of which flew with SpaceX hardware. The most recent was Polaris Dawn last September, which included the first-ever private spacewalk.

Isaacman stated more than once that seeing his nomination pulled was a disappointment. On social media, he expressed his gratitude to President Trump, the Senate, and those who supported him over the past few months, adding that the time had “been enlightening and, honestly, a bit thrilling.”

He also offered a glimpse of what he had planned for NASA in a June 9 reply via his account on X. “In short, I would have deleted the bureaucracy that impedes progress and robs resources from the mission (this is not unique to NASA it’s a govt problem),” he wrote.

“I would flatten the hierarchy, rebuild the culture — centered on ownership, urgency, mission-focus alongside a risk recalibration. Then concentrate resources on the big needle movers NASA was meant to achieve.”

However, with the nomination now rescinded, what NASA might have looked like under Isaacman — perhaps leaner, risk-tolerant, mission-focused — remains a tantalizing “what if?” for U.S. space policy.