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

Yaron Brook From the Ayn Rand Institute Weighs in on Trump

January 11, 2017
Staff

WRITER

How do we assess information reasonably and logically in a post-factual world? Yaron Brook with the Ayn Rand Institute joined The Glenn Beck Program on Wednesday to discuss the latest fake news on President-elect Trump, a Trump presidency and how to logically access the relationship between Trump and Russia. Brook's latest book --- Equal Is Unfair --- takes on the issue of equality. The left would have us believe that equality means equality of outcome or opportunity. Brooks makes the case that it means equality of freedom, liberty, rights and justice.

"The whole idea of equality is a false God. It's a false God," Brooks said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

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

GLENN: We'll have some idea, if government takes this report at all credible on Donald Trump. Because in that report, it says that Russia has made several deals on energy with Trump or Trump surrogates. I mean, again, where are we getting this? How is it happening? There's no reason to accept this information, and there's no reason to dismiss this information. It's just out now, and it is what it is. We have to use some logic.

But we'll see if anyone takes this seriously, seeing that Tillerson is having his confirmation hearing today. President of Exxon, let's see if the senator brings that up. If they don't, that speaks volumes about the credibility of this.

Yaron Brook is here from the Ayn Rand Institute. How are you, sir?

YARON: I'm good. How about you? Crazy times.

GLENN: Good.

Yeah, I know. We had some plans to talk about some other things that are important.

YARON: Yep. Yep.

GLENN: First, I want to get your thoughts on this -- this is -- you're a very logical reasoned man.

YARON: Yeah. Yeah.

GLENN: We are living in a time beyond reason and logic.

YARON: It is. Because reason and logic require facts. They require evidence. They require the ability to look at the world and know what's true and what's not or at least have an indication of what's true or what's not. We're living in an era of fake news, where you don't know where this is coming from, why this is being reported, who is reporting it. It's really hard to get your head around it, and with good reason.

GLENN: Can I ask you a question? I have a two-volume set -- I think it's actually in my office, I have a two-volume set from 1926. It's a reprint from the New York Historical Society.

YARON: Yep.

GLENN: And it's from the committee on the -- the committee looking into the conspiracies of the Revolutionary War. It was convened right after the Revolutionary War. They wanted to find out where all these rumors came from, where all this fake news came from. And it's probably 500 pages.

YARON: Yep. Sure. Sure.

GLENN: So fake news is not new. It's always been this way. It's just different.

YARON: Yeah. But it's never had the credibility it has today. I mean, people are taking it seriously in a way they never did before.

GLENN: Yes.

YARON: And generally, we don't discuss issues in a reasonable, logical way. This election, more than any other election, I think, was based so much on pure emotion.

GLENN: Yes.

YARON: And what we're seeing today is the media -- we're seeing our political leaders. We're seeing our intellectuals, from universities, promote emotion as the means towards knowledge, rather than thinking and reasoning and using logic. We don't teach our kids logic --

GLENN: So how would you logically look at this story and say, "This is how we begin to untangle this story?"

YARON: Well, I mean, you really have to look at, "What are the real sources? Without sources, it's really hard to untangle anything." But you also have to look at, "Okay. What are the incentives? What's going on here?"

And look, the Russians are bad guys. The Russians are bad guys. Putin is not a good guy.

And I think this -- there's some evidence to suggest -- there's a relationship between Putin and Trump. Something is going on. Trump is so adamantly defending Putin. Was throughout the campaign. Is now.

There's some relationship between Trump and Russia. We don't know what it is. You know, there's no reason to believe these particular allegations. But one has to be skeptical about what is going on, given how adamant Trump is, in defending anything Russian.

GLENN: Could it be -- could it be -- let's talk about Tillerson.

YARON: Yep.

GLENN: Tillerson is a deal-maker. Okay? What is our foreign policy? I don't know. We put a deal-maker in. And he's best at making deals, where?

YARON: Russia and the Middle East. And I think much of our foreign policy -- we are not going to be tough. With Tillerson there, we're not going to be tough on Russia. We're unlikely to be tough on Saudi Arabia and the Gulf --

GLENN: And you like Tillerson?

YARON: I like Tillerson.

Tillerson is an Atlas Shrugged fan. He's not a guy. He's obviously an incredibly competent CEO. He did a good job. I like CEOs. I like businessmen. I think they're great. Right?

But is he a foreign policy expert? Does he bring a principled view of foreign policy? I mean, maybe. I just don't know. I haven't heard anything to suggest he does.

Look, Donald Trump is a pragmatist. As far as I can tell, there's no principle driving a Trump administration.

And the people he surrounded himself with are mostly pragmatists. On a case-by-case basis, they might make the right choice. They might make the wrong choice. But there's no principle.

What is America's -- and granted, there hasn't been a principle on foreign policy in the United States for a very, very long time.

GLENN: Right.

YARON: But this is taking pragmatism to the next level because it's -- you know, usually people apologize for not having principles. These guys embrace the fact that --

GLENN: Well, it's not -- to me, we've always said -- or people have always said, we just -- I wish somebody would run this country as a business.

You're now going to see it run as a business. And we don't have the CEO of the United States of America. That's not how this job works.

YARON: It shouldn't. We're going to see how it works as CEO of America. I've come to call Donald Trump the central planner in chief. Because that's how he's acting. He's acting as a central planner.

I'm going to fly and talk to Carrier. I'm going to go and talk to the CEO of Ford. I'm going to be the CEO of CEOs. I'm going to tell the business world -- I'm going to tell markets how they should run, how they should function, as if I'm the CEO of the marketplace. But that's central planning. And we know -- and we know, if anything the 20th century has taught us, central plank does not work.

GLENN: Doesn't work.

YARON: And it used to be what Democrats were proud of. Their central planners. And Republicans pretended at least not to be central planners. They were for free markets. Now that distinction is gone.

GLENN: Yeah. Only after -- only after Hoover. Because Hoover was the last guy we had was very much Donald Trump. He was a central planner. He was a builder.

YARON: Well, yes. I mean, Hoover was the last businessman to be president. He gave us Smoot-Hawley, which was tariffs that drove us into the Great Depression.

GLENN: Yep. Yep.

YARON: He increased taxes. He didn't decrease taxes. He was a terrible, terrible president.

You know, this trend, to a large extent, accelerated under Hoover. But it really goes back to Wilson --

GLENN: Yes. You don't have to tell me.

YARON: I mean, Wilson is the first president to be a central planner.

Yeah, to bring it to the United States.

GLENN: You're plowing an old field. Let's plow a new one here.

The G.O.P. and what they're going to do with Obamacare, we have had -- we have had years for this moment.

YARON: It's unbelievable to me. Six years, right? Since Obamacare was passed. They've been talking about repeal, replace, repeal, replace.

Okay. So where's your plan? Right? You've had six years to put together a plan. The plan is not that hard. We've seen outlines of this plan in the Wall Street Journal, everywhere. There is a plan out there. Find it. Put it together. It might be flawed. It might not be the perfect plan. But don't come out as babbling idiots, and we've got a plan. Maybe. We'll see.

You know, it might take six months. It might take three years. Who knows.

I mean, this is really Republicans living up to the stupid party label, what they're doing with Obamacare right now.

Now, on top of that, there are suggestions that they want to keep real important parts of Obamacare.

GLENN: Yeah.

YARON: Preexisting conditions. If you load preexisting conditions onto insurance companies, they're not insurance companies anymore.

GLENN: Right.

YARON: They're just Social Security-type companies. And they're subsidiaries of the government, and the Democrats love this.

Obamacare was always planned to fail. The whole purpose of Obamacare was to fail. But to fail as a -- as -- as we trade markets. We trade marketplaces. We let you have your private insurance. That doesn't work.

So we have to have single-payer universal health care run by the government. If Republicans play into that by keeping preexisting conditions or by doing other things that are basically destroying insurance markets, they're just playing into the hands of the --

GLENN: What you're saying right now is one of my biggest fears, is that people look at whatever is going to come out of the G.O.P. now as a conservative, small government, constitutional answer.

YARON: Yep. Yep.

GLENN: And I'm not seeing those yet. I hope to. But I'm not seeing -- especially when it comes to Obamacare. When they fail or God forbid, make things worse --

YARON: This is it.

GLENN: -- then everybody will say, "It's time to go all the way. Let's go Marxist."

YARON: No, I mean, this is the lesson that everybody learned from the George Bush years. Right?

GLENN: Yes.

YARON: If this is what small government conservatives are, then we don't want anything to do with that. And we got Obama, and we got everything that Obama represents. If this is what defending America means, going to Iraq and screwing it up, then we're going to get an Obama to clean up the mess.

So, yes, the backlash against Republicans when they do really, really stupid things is what -- is part of what destroys this country. And there's nothing to suggest that this administration is going to be significantly different. We'll see. We'll see.

GLENN: Have you seen anything that surprises you, that you say, "Wow, this is good?"

YARON: You know, some of the appointments were -- are not bad, right? Labor secretary. I forget the guy's name. But seems like a good guy. He gets minimum wage. He gets some of these issues on the right way.

GLENN: Yeah.

YARON: You know, Price as Secretary of Health and Human Services, I thought was a good choice. Price actually has a plan to replace Obamacare, you know, with free market reforms. Why not just embrace that, right?

GLENN: Right.

YARON: He's the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

But for some reason, the House and the Senate -- and this is partially because Republicans are such cowards, they can't actually embrace a free market solution to anything.

The one thing we will get -- and we can guarantee this, right? -- is a tax cut. Republicans are good at cutting taxes, right? They don't cut spending, so the consequences: The next president has to raise taxes in order to close the deficit gap or pretend to close the deficit gap, but we'll get tax cuts. And that's a good thing. Right? I'm not going to demean tax cuts. But if you don't cut spending, it doesn't matter.

GLENN: Yeah. Okay. So one last thing here. Yaron Brook, from the Ayn Rand Institute. And one of the best critical thinkers in America.

YARON: Appreciate that. Thank you.

GLENN: When we're looking at all of the things that we're about to see, what is the -- what is the flag that you would raise up and say, "We have to do this one thing?" Is it -- is it a policy? Is it we have to get a handle on our -- our uniting with each other, on fake news, on -- what?

YARON: See. I don't buy into this uniting stuff. We're not going to be united. We're split in this country. We're split 50/50. We don't agree. And I don't have a problem with the fact that we don't agree. There are clearly different points of view out there. I think some of us are, and most people are wrong. But that's the reality. There's disagreement. And I, for example, have always loved gridlock in Washington. I like disagreement in Washington because then they don't --

GLENN: When I say uniting, I mean not tearing each other -- not dehumanizing one another.

YARON: I mean, that would be nice, but --

GLENN: Being able to live next to each other and say, "Boy, I really disagree with him, but."

YARON: It's going to be difficult. I think what we need to rediscover to unite us and do a lot of things is, what is America? I think we've lost that. I think in that sense, Obama has won. We have become another European country. In many respects, the American spirit, what made us uniquely American, what are the foundation ideas -- the foundational concepts of what America stands for?

The founding -- the true founding principles of this country, that -- that is not in the debate. Nobody talks about it.

And this presidential -- you know, one was more than ever. Donald Trump never mentions the Founders. He never really talks about the Constitution. It's not important to him, right? Those are principles.

God forbid we should have principles. We need to rediscover what we are. What is American exceptionalism? People throw that out all the time. And they claim, "Oh, we're pro-American. We love America."

But Donald Trump has raised that question up: What does it means to be pro-America? What does America first actually mean? And unless you understand what America is -- America is not a geographical place. It's an idea.

GLENN: It's an idea.

YARON: And the question is: What is that idea? I think very few Americans today know what that idea is. I think that's reflected in our politics. That's reflected in our dialogue. Very few people know what the principles that this country was founded on are and what made us the greatest nation in human history.

GLENN: Let's have you back, and let's do an hour of just that.

YARON: Yeah. What is America?

GLENN: What is America? Would you do that?

YARON: That would be fabulous. Love that.

GLENN: Okay. Yaron, thank you very much.

STU: And, Yaron, the book is Equal Is Unfair.

YARON: Equal Is Unfair.

GLENN: I am sorry. I was not even told you had a book.

YARON: Well, I handed you a book not that long ago. A nice autograph.

GLENN: Oh, I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry. Okay. Horrible.

YARON: But the book is called Equal Is Unfair. It's available everywhere. And it takes on one of these big issues: What does it mean when the Founders say all men are created equal? Does it mean what the left suggests, equality of outcome or even equality of opportunity? And I argue no. It just means equality of freedom, equality of liberty, equality of rights, equality before the law, the law properly understood. And the whole idea of equality is a false God. It's a false God.

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.