Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

PolitiFact: 73 Percent of Trump's Statements Are False

March 01, 2016
Lori Hanes

Writer

PolitiFact has looked at Donald Drumpf's statements and finds that 73 percent of his statements are false.

"He is a sociopathic liar. He doesn't care. He may not even know he's lying anymore. He just believes whatever it is that he makes up in his own head," Glenn said Tuesday on The Glenn Beck Program. "You'll never see his income tax. Not because there's something going on there. But because the people who have worked with him closely for over ten years estimate his net value, his net worth at $150 million."

Should that be true, what would it say about the character of man who refuses to release tax returns so people won't find out his whole life is a lie?  

Additionally, it's well-documented that Drumpf quickly turns from friend to foe should he feel threatened.

"If you don't do him a solid, he destroys you," Glenn said.

Here's a sampling of Drumpf's grade school name-calling:

Erick Erickson — a total low life

Arianna Huffington — a liberal clown

Chuck Todd — pathetic

Charles Krauthammer — a loser and a jerk

Bob Vander Plaats — a phony and a con man

Glenn Beck — a dopey idiot

An article today in the Weekly Standard, written by Stephan Hayes, makes one ponder this pertinent question:

If Drumpf condemns anyone he dislikes, why does he go soft on David Duke and the KKK?

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:

GLENN:  It's Super Tuesday, and it's much more serious than it sounds, the responsibility on each of our shoulders today, to do our homework before we walk into our polling locations.  The fate of America rests on your shoulders.  But no pressure.  We start there, right now.

(music)

GLENN:  Hello, America.  And welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.  Today from Washington, DC, and the studios at WMAL, I want to thank 1000 KTOK for hosting us yesterday in Oklahoma City and WMAL for hosting us today in Washington, DC, as we prepare for CPAC that is happening this weekend.  We'll be broadcasting from there Thursday and Friday and talked to some of the people at CPAC.  Max Lucado is going to be on with us today, as is Ted Cruz.  

It is Super Tuesday.  25 percent of all the delegates will be assigned by tomorrow morning.  And it's going to be pretty hard to -- to stop Donald Drumpf at this point.  Not impossible.  But pretty hard to stop.  I'm looking at the news today, and I find it interesting that all of these people are coming out with these plans to stop Donald Drumpf.

And the one I keep hearing about is insanity.  And it's Marco Rubio's plan, not to win any of the -- any of the contest today.  His plan is not to win any of the contest, but to believe just to have enough delegates to go to a brokered convention.  The other plan is to have the G.O.P. kick Donald out and run somebody else in his stead.

What kind of banana republic do we live in?  I am not a fan of Donald Drumpf, nor will I vote for Donald Drumpf.  But I have to tell you, if the American people say they're going to vote for Donald Drumpf, the G.O.P. was the one that made the deal.  The G.O.P. was the one that said, "You have to run -- you can't run for third party."  You think you're going to take his delegates away and not start a civil war?  You think you're going to kick him out of the party and not start a civil war?

The G.O.P. is done.  They're just done.  They didn't get it.  They have no idea why Donald Drumpf has any kind of traction at all.  And none of their plans include the guy who is number two in the delegate count.  They refuse to look at the guy who actually is going to win some states today.  Why?

Because he's anti-establishment.  Because he will stop all of this nonsense that's happening in Washington.  So why get behind that guy?  You got to get behind the guy that doesn't win any states.  That doesn't make any sense.

Because the establishment is still all about power.  It's all about control.  We have gone down this road now of progressivism far too long.  And people don't see it.  I got up this morning and I was thinking about it.  I was watching the news and I thought, "You know, it's amazing to me -- it's amazing to me.  This guy, Donald Drumpf, would be laughed out if he was running for Democrats.  We would laugh at him.  We would all say, oh, my gosh, bring it on.  Exactly what Hillary Clinton doing."

There's a new story out about how Hillary Clinton is salivating at Donald Drumpf.  By the way, new poll out shows Donald Drumpf does not beat Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton in a head-to-head.  And they haven't even begun.  Look at what the New York Times said yesterday.

New York Times has an off the record, confidential meeting with Donald Drumpf back in January.  Where supposedly he said, "Look, everything is negotiable.  Don't worry about it.  I know you're all freaked out."  But basically what he said -- what was it on Greta, I can be anything.  I'm going to be changing rapidly once I get the nomination.  I'll be changing rapidly.  I can be whatever I need to be at the time.  Basically he said that, apparently to the New York Times, in a confidential meeting, that everything is negotiable, and the stuff he's saying on the border, don't worry about.

Well, I called yesterday for Donald Drumpf to demand that the New York Times release that audiotape.  Because they said they will, but they can't release it because it was a confidential meeting.  And they can't release it without his permission.  But if they ask, if Donald Drumpf asks, they will release it. 

Well, I think this is an outrageous lie by the New York Times.  Donald Drumpf has said many times that he thinks one of the biggest liars is the New York Times.  I happen to agree with him.  I think that he should demand that the New York Times produce that tape.  And show that he did not indeed say those things.

Except he was on Hannity last night, talking about it.  When he spoke to Sean, he said, "Well, look, yes, a lot of things are negotiable.  But the New York Times is a liar."  Well, if the New York Times is a liar, you should -- you should demand that the tape be released and then sue them.

Don, I know you love to sue them.  You love to sue them.  Suing is a way of life with you.  Because to quote you:  You get greedy.  And you say, "Give me the money.  Give me the money."  And you grab and you grab and you grab.  That's a quote from you.  

So I know you're greedy, which is another beautiful, wonderful, uge, Christian characteristic.  But I know you get greedy and you want to grab.  So sue them.  Because you have them dead to rights.  They are hurting your reputation by saying that you are telling the American people one thing and doing the exact opposite.  Because we know you would never do that.  That's ridiculous to assume and insulting to you.

He won't call for the release of that tape.  Guarantee it.  Because I bet you my house, that what's on that tape is exactly what the New York Times says is on that tape.  Because Donald Drumpf is a liar.

Nobody wants to hear that about people.  PolitiFact has looked at his statements and 76 percent of his statements -- or, 73 percent of his statements are false.

He is a sociopathic liar.  He doesn't care.  He may not even know he's lying anymore.  He just believes whatever it is that he makes up in his own head.  You'll never see his income tax.  Not because there's something going on there.  But because the people who have worked with him closely for over ten years estimate his net value, his net worth at $150 million.

Just so you can put that into perspective, that's what -- that's about what Forbes magazine says I'm worth.  So that knocks Donald Drumpf down lots of pegs.  By the way, I'm not worth that.

But imagine if it meant something to me.  What would that say something about my character, if I was like, "No, I'm worth more than that.  Oh, man, how dare they say that I'm only worth $150 million.  I'm worth a billion dollars.  I'm worth $500 million."  What would that say about me?

I laugh at the numbers that they always quote from me because that's what my company does in revenue.  That's not what I get paid.  One of my companies hasn't even paid me in five years.

But what would it say about a man's character if you wouldn't release your tax returns because you just didn't want people to know how much you really are worth because your whole life is a lie?  

The other thing that I think Donald Drumpf, the reason why he's not releasing his tax returns, is because he's not as charitable as he says he is.  He says he's been giving money for years to vets.  My guess is, his charitable contributions are less than 2 percent.  I'll bet you that they're zero.  But definitely worth less than 2 percent.

He raises money through the Drumpf Foundation or the Drumpf -- he goes and asks other people to give money.  And then he doesn't give money himself.

And, by the way, there's people asking now, "Why hasn't he delivered on the charity funds that he promised in Iowa?"  You would think -- I don't even understand this story.  You have -- you've selected the charities, why haven't you given the money to the charities?  The money is there, you've selected the charities, why haven't you just released the funds?

Anybody see the John Oliver, just amazing monologue of 20 minutes taking down Donald Drumpf?  Stu, Pat, Jeffy, have you seen -- you saw the whole monologue?

PAT:  Yeah.  We talked about some of it yesterday.

STU:  Yeah.  We talked about some of --

GLENN:  Yeah, go ahead.

STU:  We talked about some of it yesterday.  And one of the things we talked about was that he had the exact same experience we had with Donald Drumpf, in which Drumpf also accused him and Jon Stewart of wanting him on the show and Drumpf said no.  So that's the only reason those people hate him, which is the exact same thing he said about us.  And not true in either circumstance.

GLENN:  Yeah.

PAT:  Can you imagine thinking so much of yourself that if somebody -- if you tell somebody you're not going to do an interview with them, that that's the sole reason that they don't like you from then on.  I mean, that's -- you think a lot of yourself when it's just, "Wow, he didn't do an interview with us.  So now we hate his guts and we're going to destroy this man."  It's so pathetic.

GLENN:  Not only how much do you think of yourself, what do you think the world is like?  I mean, what kind of world do you live in, where because -- it's usually self-diagnosis.  You know, when somebody like this says something about you.  They're usually diagnosing themself.  They see the things in others that is in them.

So he is like that.  If you don't do him a solid, he destroys you.  And so he thinks that everybody else -- because you won't do an interview.  I won't do an interview.  You must want to destroy me.  No, that's you in your sick, twisted world.  That's you, man.

STU:  Yeah.  And the Weekly Standard had a great point on this today, which is -- I mean, we all know the way -- what Drumpf does with people he doesn't like.  What does he do to people he doesn't like?  Erick Erickson, a total low-life.  Arianna Huffington, a liberal clown.  Chuck Todd, pathetic.  Charles Krauthammer, a loser and a clown.  Bill Kristol, a sad case.  Bob Vander Plaats is a phony and a con man.

PAT:  Jeez.

GLENN:  Jeez.

STU:  We already know, the things he's called Glenn fills up a whole page of the New York Times insult list.  In fact, the New York Times provided a catalog of the 199 people, places, and things Donald Drumpf has insulted on Twitter.  A complete list, which, of course, is not actually a complete list.  

But here's the point from the Weekly Standard which is brilliant today:  After a year of his candidacy, the political world knows well what it looks like when Donald Drumpf wants to offer an unequivocal condemnation.  When it comes to David Duke and the KKK, we still haven't seen one.  

He hasn't called David Duke a loser.  He hasn't called David Duke a scumbag.  He hasn't called David Duke a jerk or a phony or a con man.

PAT:  Right.  And why?  Because he supports him.

STU:  Because he supports him.

GLENN:  What do you think about Rush Limbaugh's excuse for this?  He said yesterday that Donald Drumpf was on the Sunday shows, and they have more gravitas.  They get more play than just the Megyn Kelly or Sean Hannity or something like that.  And so he was on those Sunday shows and he was worried about the poll numbers because the debate didn't go well.  And so he just didn't want to alienate anyone who might vote for him.  So it's not really an excuse.  I mean, it's still really bad.  But it's at least a reason why he didn't do it.  Do you buy into any of that?

STU:  I actually kind of do.  But the -- it's funny because people are saying, "Well, this is an excuse he's providing."  Actually it's the accusation.  The accusation is that he's pandering to white supremacists.

PAT:  That's not a good excuse.

STU:  It's not an excuse.  It's actually we're accusing him of.  

GLENN:  Yes.  Yes. 

STU:  And I think that is exactly what he's doing.  I mean, I don't know that anyone is saying that he -- while there is certainly long-term evidence and it will be exploited like crazy that he has bad racial tendencies, I don't think he's throwing a hood on him Friday nights.  That's not what I think Donald Drumpf is doing.

GLENN:  No, he's not a Klan member.  He's not a Klan member.

STU:  But he's pandering to these people like crazy.  And that's not a positive.  That's actually the negative we're accusing him of.  So I don't know if Rush framed that as an excuse.  But it's actually the thing I'm complaining about.

PAT:  I think the hoodies are for Tuesdays and Thursdays.  Not Fridays.

STU:  Okay.  Sorry.

GLENN:  Let me give you one thing real quick, and then I have to take a break.  

There's a new poll out in Florida.  38 percent of Floridians believe that Ted Cruz might be the Zodiac Killer.  The serial killer from, what?  A decade ago?  Or two decades ago?  The serial killer in Florida.  

38 percent of Floridians believe that Ted Cruz is the Zodiac Killer.  We'll get into it in a second.  But I just want to say this, even with Floridians believing that he's the Zodiac Killer, he still beats Marco Rubio in Florida. (laughter)

Featured Image: Screenshot of The Glenn Beck Program broadcasting from WMAL in Washington, D.C.

Top THREE reasons we NEED the Panama Canal

Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Is Trump seriously planning a military conquest of the Panama Canal?

In the weeks leading up to the inauguration, Donald Trump launched the Panama Canal into the national spotlight. The canal is one of the most important passages in the world, and its continued operation has been critical for both the U.S. military and economy since its construction.

Since America relinquished sovereignty of the canal, China has asserted its authority in the region. The Chinese Communist Party has been growing its influence in Panama and neighboring Latin American countries, convincing them to join their "Belt and Road Initiative," an effort to poise China as the main economic power in developing nations across the world. Panama in particular is quickly becoming a Chinese puppet state. There are currently over 200,000 Chinese living in Panama, a Chinese company runs two of the canal's five major ports, and another Chinese company provides telecommunication service for a large portion of the canal. The government of Panama has even gone as far as cutting diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

It's clear that the Panama Canal is under serious threat of falling into Chinese hands, but President Trump doesn't intend to let them move in. Here are the top three reasons we need the Panama Canal:

1. The canal was built by the U.S.

Hulton Archive / Stringer | Getty Images

Without the United States, neither Panama nor the Panama Canal would exist. In 1903, after Colombia refused to allow the U.S. to build a canal across the isthmus of Panama, President Teddy Roosevelt devised a controversial plan. He supported a Panamanian independence movement, which swiftly overthrew the local Colombian government. Meanwhile, he stationed a U.S. warship off the coast, preventing Colombia from sending military forces to retake Panama.

The moment Panama declared its independence, the U.S. recognized it and struck a deal with the new government: the U.S. would control the Canal Zone, while Panama would receive $10 million and an annual payment of $250,000. Construction of the canal took over a decade, cost $375 million, and resulted in thousands of American casualties, making it the most expensive U.S. construction project of its time.

Fast forward to 1964 when tensions between the U.S. and Panama over the canal erupted into a riot. President Lyndon B. Johnson decided it was time to transfer control of the canal to Panama. However, this proved more complicated than expected. In 1968, General Omar Torrijos, a known ally of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, seized control of Panama in a coup. Negotiations over the Canal stalled, as many Americans opposed giving such an important asset to a controversial figure. It wasn’t until 1999, following the deployment of 27,000 U.S. troops to facilitate yet another change in power, that the Canal was officially handed over to Panama.

2. The canal is vital for the U.S. economy

IVAN PISARENKO / Contributor | Getty Images

The U.S. relies heavily on the Panama Canal for commercial shipping. Between 13 and 14 thousand ships use the Panama Canal every year, which is roughly 40 percent of the global cargo ship traffic. Additionally, 72 percent of ships traversing the canal are either heading toward or leaving a U.S. port.

The time ships save using the Panama Canal reduces shipping costs massively. For example, when the canal first opened in 1922, it was estimated that a ship’s journey from Oregon to the UK, was shortened by 42 percent, reducing costs by 31 percent. If the Panama Canal was blocked or destroyed, or if American merchant vessels were denied passage, the effects on the U.S. economy would be tremendous.

3. The canal is a key defense point for the U.S. military

Historical / Contributor | Getty Images

Similarly, the canal is key to the U.S. military and national security. The canal shaves off approximately 8,000 miles of the voyage between the Pacific and the Atlantic. If U.S. Navy ships were denied access in a time of crisis, the extra time required to bypass the canal would be disastrous. Conversely, if the U.S. can keep the Panama Canal from being used by foreign aggressors, it would provide a massive advantage in future conflicts.

A foreign enemy could easily exploit the canal's current vulnerability. This was proven in 2021 when a cargo ship accidentally blocked the Suez Canal for a week, paralyzing global trade. Imagine China intentionally sabotaging the Panama Canal, considering it controls ports on both ends, owns a bridge that spans the Canal, provides its telecom services, and has the second-largest fleet of ships using the route.

TOP 5 takeaways from JD Vance's 'Face the Nation' interview

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

After an eventful first week in office, JD Vance wrapped the week up with a bang of an interview on "Face the Nation."

Last weekend, Vice President Vance joined "Face the Nation" host Margaret Brennan, who drilled Vance on everything from the economy to immigration. Vance clapped back with polite yet cutting responses, and he defended Trump against some of her more accusatory queries.

If there was any lingering doubt that JD Vance wasn't vice presidential (or presidential) material, they have just been blown away. Here are the major takeaways from his electricinterview on Sunday:

1. J.D. Vance defends Trump's cabinet picks

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Brennan opened the interview with a barrage of questions that brought up concerns surrounding some of Trump's cabinet picks, specifically Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard.

Brennan began by questioning how effective Pete Hegseth could be as Secretary of Defence, given that he was confirmed with a tie in the Senate that VP Vance broke. Vance responded with a quick breakdown of all of the issues the military is currently facing. Vance argued that Hegseth's unpopularity in the Senate results from his being a disruptor.

Brennan also attacked Tulsi Gabbard, calling her unfit for the title of "Director of National Intelligence." Vance defended Gabbard, citing her formidable resume and strong character. Vance also discussed the corruption of our intelligence services, which out-of-control bureaucrats have weaponized against the interests of the American people. He expressed his belief that Gabbard would be the right person to reign in the corruption and return the National Intelligence Service to its intended purpose.

2. J.D. Vance explains how Trump's economic policies will lower consumer prices

Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan pushed Vance on the economy, specifically questioning when prices for consumer goods would begin to fall. Vance explained that within the plethora of executive orders issued by Trump during his first week in office, many were aimed at bringing more jobs back into America, which will raise wages and lower prices. Other orders will boost energy production, which will reduce energy costs and decrease the costs of goods.

3. J.D. Vance sheds light on needed FEMA reforms

ROBYN BECK / Staff | Getty Images

Brennan drilled Vance on President Trump's proposed FEMA reforms, specifically regarding Trump's suggestion to send states a percentage of federal disaster relief funds so that they can quickly distribute aid rather than wait on federal action. While Brennen argued that FEMA has specialists and resources that states would not have access to, leaving people without aid, Vance argued that recent disasters, like Hurricane Helene, have proven that FEMA's current bureaucratic red tape deprived Americans of immediate aid when they needed it most.

4. J.D. Vance defends Trump's mass deportations

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

Vance defended Trump's decision to allow ICE to conduct raids into churches and schools against Brennen's criticisms, arguing that law enforcement should remove a dangerous criminal from a school or church, regardless of their immigration status. He also advocated for Trump's proposed changes to birthright citizenship to prevent illegal immigrants from abusing the constitutional amendment by having "anchor babies" on U.S. soil.

Vance also took a hard stance supporting Trump suspension of admitting Afghan refugees. Brennan argued that Afghan refugees were going through a thorough vetting process and were now being abandoned by the U.S. However, Vance cited the foiled terrorist attack in Oklahoma City during Trump's 2024 campaign that was orchestrated by an Afghan refugee, who was allegedly vetted by federal agents. The vetting process is clearly flawed, and it was a prudent decision to halt the admission of these refugees until further notice.

5. J.D. Vance insists that Trump will still reign in Big Tech

PIERRE-PHILIPPE MARCOU / Contributor | Getty Images

To wrap up the interview, Brennan questioned the Trump administration's stance on Big Tech given the attendance of the industry's biggest names at Trump's inauguration, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple CEO Tim Cook, and TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew. Vance assured Brennan that Trump is still resolved to curb the power and influence of Big Tech.

Top THREE reasons the U.S. NEEDS Greenland

EMIL STACH / Contributor | Getty Images

Are Trump's repeated promises to claim Greenland for the U.S. just belligerent imperialism or a deft move to secure the future of America?

During his patriotic inaugural address, President Trump reiterated his campaign promise to expand American territories, including securing U.S. control over Greenland. This is not a new idea despite what the mainstream media may claim.

The idea of buying Greenland was originally introduced by progressive hero Woodrow Wilson in 1917 as an attempt to secure the homeland as America was gearing up to enter the First World War. The second attempt came after World War II when President Truman tried to buy the island from Denmark in another attempt to shore up national security, this time against the Soviets. Since then, Trump floated the idea in 2019, which was met with much the same ridicule as now.

The truth is that the acquisition of Greenland represents far more than just an outlet for repressed imperialist desires. It would be one of America's best investments in a long time, which is why we've been eyeballing it for so long. Here are three reasons the U.S. needs Greenland:

Strategic Military Position

THOMAS TRAASDAHL / Contributor | Getty Images

For the majority of the 20th century, Europe was the region from which a foreign attack on American soil could be launched: the Germans for the first half of the century, and the Russians for the second half. On both occasions, Greenland stood between our foreign enemies and the United States.

After the World War II, America was the official military defender of Greenland, per an agreement with Denmark. Under this agreement, the U.S. built Pituffik Air Force Base, a remote base 750 miles north of the Arctic Circle. Due to its location, approximately halfway between D.C. and Moscow, the Pentagon still views Pituffik as a vital component of America's nuclear defense.

The U.S. also built a secret base within the ice cap known as Camp Century. Camp Century was part scientific outpost, part nuclear-tipped ballistic missile silo built in the ice to withstand a direct atomic strike. The nearly two miles of icy tunnels were powered by a nuclear reactor and were designed to survive a nuclear first strike, and return fire. Although abandoned in 1967, Camp Century still symbolizes the strategic importance of Greenland for U.S. security.

Untapped Resources

OLIVIER MORIN / Contributor | Getty Images

While Greenland's population is a mere 56,000, the island has a total landmass nearly three times the size of Texas. According to a 2009 geological assessment, a whopping 30 percent of the Earth's undiscovered natural gas, and 13 percent of its undiscovered oil is locked away beneath Greenland's icy ground. There are also untapped deposits of valuable rare earth metals including copper, graphite, and lithium.

Neither Greenland nor Denmark have any real plans to tap into this immense wealth trapped beneath the ice, but it could prove crucial for ending the West's dependency on China. China has the global market cornered on rare earth minerals- including America. We acquire 72 percent of our rare earth mineral imports from China, making us entirely dependent on them for the manufacturing of many essential goods. Tapping Greenland's natural resources would help free America, and the West, from China's yolk.

Polar Silk Road

mark peterson / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2018 China launched an ambitious project that aimed to cut the travel time of cargo vessels between its ports and European markets in half. China, in collaboration with Russia, plans on developing new shipping routes through the Arctic Ocean. This bold new strategy, dubbed the "Polar Silk Road," has been made possible thanks to new tech, including a fleet of Russian, nuclear-powered icebreakers, the latest of which is capable of breaking through nearly 10 feet of ice.

With clear waterways from eastern China and Northern Europe, it won't be long before the first cargo ships brave the frigid sea and China looks to the next leg of the journey: the Northwest Passage. The Northwest Passage is the area of sea between Canada and the North Pole that would be an optimal shipping route between America's East Coast and Asia if it wasn't frozen over most of the year. But with new technology, we may be able to overcome the challenges of the ice and open the passage to commercial traffic, and Greenland is positioned directly on the passage's easternmost mouth.

Greenland would quickly become a key location along the Northwestern Passage, acting as a sentinel of the east, with the ability to control traffic through the trade route. If China or Russia were to take control of Greenland, they would dominate the Northwestern Passage, along with the rest of the new northern trade routes.

Is Romania squashing its own 'Trump' candidate?

DANIEL MIHAILESCU / Contributor | Getty Images

This week the streets of Bucharest, the capital of Romania, erupted in protest after the Constitutional Courts annulled the recent first round of the presidential election after the "far-right" candidate won.

The government is lying to you. If you have been listening to Glenn for a long time you already know that, and you also know that if you try to call attention to the lies you get labeled a conspiracy theorist or "far-right." This is not only true in America but across the world. Politicians cheat, steal, and grab power, then lie about all of it. This is the root of countless issues across every government on the planet, and recently Romania has become the latest example of this unfortunate phenomenon.

But what is really happening in Romania? Was this an actual attempt to stamp out someone who would shed light on lies and corruption? Or did the Romanian government put a stop to a genuine bad actor?

The Election

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

On December 6th, 2024, the Romanian Constitutional Court canceled the second round of the presidential election amid claims of Russian interference. The second round of the election would have seen right-wing candidate, Calin Georgescu face off against pro-European centrist Elena Lasconi.

The trouble surrounds Georgescu, who stands accused of using Russian aid to run an unprecedented social media campaign that helped him win an election pollsters claimed he stood no chance of winning. Georgescu's rapid rise in popularity on social media does raise some eyebrows, and to add to the suspicion he declared he had zero campaign spending. On the other hand, Georgescu's supporters claim that his quick rise to stardom and underdog victory is due to the growing resentment for the ever-out-of-touch political elite.

Georgescu's Platform

Andrei Pungovschi / Stringer | Getty Images

Georgescu rose to prominence on a platform many of his detractors have labeled "far-right," "pro-Russian," and "populist" (sound familiar?). His positions include supporting Romanian farmers, increasing Romanian self-reliance, and increasing local energy production. Georgescu has been lauded for his message of hope and vision for the future and his dedication to truth, freedom, and sovereignty.

Georgescu is also a vocal Christian and a supporter of the Romanian Orthodox Church. He has questioned the climate change and COVID-19 narrative as well as NATO and the war in Ukraine, which is how he earned his "Pro-Russian" monicker. Georgescu promised to respect and honor its obligations to the EU and NATO, but only to the extent that they respect Romania and its interests.

What Happens Next?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

After Georgescu's unexpected victory, the Romanian Constitutional Courts annulled the election's first round and scheduled it to restart on May 4th. As of now, it is unclear whether Georgescu will be allowed to participate in the new election. This act by the Constitutional Courts triggered mass protests in the capital, Bucharest, and has caused many Romainians to question the state of democracy within their country.

Many of the protesters are calling what happened a coup and are demanding the election be allowed to continue to the second round. They are also calling for the resignation of current President Klaus Iohannis, who has maintained power thanks to the incomplete elections. Georgescu has officially challenged the court's decision and even made a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights, but it is unclear if his appeal will make any difference.