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

People Don’t Mock the President in Egypt – but Bassem Youssef Dared To

September 28, 2017
Staff

WRITER

He’s known as “Egypt’s Jon Stewart.” Bassem Youssef created a satirical political show that channeled the feelings of many Egyptians, and he has since been exiled from his own country.

Now living in Los Angeles, Youssef has shared his incredible story in a memoir, “Revolution for Dummies.” A documentary released earlier this year called “Tickling Giants” captured his journey from heart surgeon to star to expatriate.

He talked with Glenn on Wednesday about the Arab Spring; comedy and satire; and why oppressive governments don’t want people to be aware and educated. Listen to the amazing interview on Glenn’s Soundcloud (embedded above).

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: There's a guy -- there's very few people that have come on this program that have -- that I've put into the category of a real hero, a global hero. Somebody who is actually facing down giants and not popular with anyone, except the people. And has stared down true dictators. And rewriting history and the book of how things are done. Living in Egypt, there are -- they don't do satire. They don't have The Daily Show. They don't have shows where you take on the president. You find yourself in a prison. The world is radically different in the Middle East.

There's a guy who was a doctor. And during the Arab Spring, he went out to Tahrir Square, and he just started aiding people, helping people. And what he saw was different than what he was seeing on television.

He decided to do a YouTube television show with a friend. And it became an overnight success, gigantic. Before you know it, he's now doing a television show, where he's actually taking on the president of his country. And doing things that had never, ever been done before under a dictatorship. He has been hated by Mubarak. He was arrested by Morsi, and el-Sisi doesn't like him all that much either. His name is Dr. Bassem Youssef, and he joins us now. They call him the Jon Stewart of Egypt. Welcome, Bassem, how are you?

BASSEM: Hello, Glenn, how are you? Such a pleasure to talk to you. Man, I mean, I've kind of known you forever. Such a pleasure. How are you?

GLENN: Thank you. I would imagine that you have strong opinions about me, and we can get to those if you care to later. But I would rather talk about you.

BASSEM: No, no, no. I enjoy all your views, and I have to say, I have watched you, I don't know, make -- I find your ways and -- I don't know. I respect all kinds of freedom of speech. And I have no strong opinions about you at all, no.

GLENN: That's fine. So, Bassem,the one thing that we should come together on was I was really concerned about the Arab Spring because of the Muslim Brotherhood.

BASSEM: Yeah.

GLENN: And I really felt that the -- as I said at the time, Mubarak is a monster. And we as Americans, we helped create him. I mean, we have no business to -- to tell anybody about freedom. We were in bed with Mubarak for a long time. Horrible person. And here we are with our ghost plane, sending people and saying, we're not going to torture anybody. We'll just bring to you Mubarak. And I was concerned because I do know the history of the Middle East. Not like you do. And I do know the -- I take people who are Islamic extremists at their word.

And I saw the Arab Spring as an opportunity for those who wanted to create caliphates. As it turns out, you guys dodged a bullet, and it was ISIS, you know, forming the caliphate. And you guys got away from the Muslim Brotherhood.

In watching your documentary, I can't imagine living it. Can you -- can you tell the American people what it is like to go through a revolution?

BASSEM: Yeah. It's very chaotic. I chose comedy and satire to go through with it. Which is very difficult. Because we happened to write comedy where things were basically falling apart outside, especially threats -- I mean, like there were people -- I was put under siege in my theater, writing my show. And I was put under siege by people who were supporters by the military, not the Islamists.

So -- so the thing is, you are completely right about being scared of the Islamist. And it's totally justified. But what people miss is that Islamism, radical Islamism has been also a tool by military as much as it is a tool by Islamists.

GLENN: Oh, yeah. Oh, I agree.

BASSEM: Yeah. It was set out in 1980, who actually gave a greater power to Sharia in the Constitution in order to have unlimited times of reelection. It was (inaudible) in Pakistan, who also pushed into the Sharia laws, so that he will appease the Islamists. It was Gaafar Nimeiry in Sudan, who changed the country into an Islamic State because military dictatorship was not working.

And even now, right now, the military under el-Sisi is using all the conservative values of conservatism. It's kind of like our Islamism is better than their Islamism. And it has put people in jail because if they try to reform some interpretation of the religion.

So the thing is, I don't think that the Muslim Brotherhood were on the way to the caliphate. As a matter of fact, they were in bed with the military. The military actually pushed them to the front, because the Muslim Brotherhood would give them guarantees so they will keep their own benefits.

GLENN: Correct.

BASSEM: So it is basically a game. You know that the most radical people in Egypt are the Salitis, which are kind of like the right, right, right wing. It's kind of like Muslim Brotherhood on steroids. They were created by the Mubarak regime. And why?

Because these military regimes they tell the West, hey, we are quote and quote, secular. If you go, you will have these people to deal with. So it's kind of like, either me or chaos. Either me or ISIS. What do you choose?

So, of course, all of the Western (inaudible) say, all right. You know what, he's a son of an SOB. But he's our SOB. And it is in their benefit to keep that duality. So they do not -- they do not support education. They don't support awareness. They don't support openness. It is their own best interest to have people stuck between the duality. The bully with the gun or the bully with the Sharia.

GLENN: So we see -- we see people over here. We're marching in the streets. And both sides are marching in the streets now. And they're, I'm so oppressed. And blah, blah, blah. And then you see people like you, where -- where people in America don't have any concept of going on television or going online and telling a joke about a president or a leader and then being arrested for that or being disappeared.

BASSEM: Yeah. Yeah. Yes, yes. And this is a blessing. I mean, I know that you guys are always kind of concerned about how the state of -- and I think this is a good thing. I mean, when I was asked, like, Bassem, do you think we are like a bunch of kids because we are complaining, while you guys went through a lot? I said, no, I think you should be complaining. Because it's like you guys are like someone who is used to a certain kind of service. He goes into a restaurant, he doesn't like his soup, it's cool, he turns it away.

Nobody on the other table is like, oh, you should be grateful because other people in the world don't have food to eat.

No, you have actual war, like for the past 400 years. Civil war. Revolution, in the beginning. Civil rights, to get this kind of service.

So when people think that this is not the kind of service they paid for through their history, they -- they should be upset. And it's fine. So it doesn't have -- you shouldn't be waiting until it actually goes down the drain.

GLENN: So I agree with you. But here's where, you know -- I'm probably a little more like you in some ways. I'm hated by every president in our country. I don't think I've been liked by a president since Ronald Reagan.

BASSEM: Good for you.

GLENN: Yeah. But the last two presidents have made it personal. The last two presidents have -- and it's getting worse -- are making this very, very personal. And we're starting to creep to a place to where, you know, the president just this last weekend said, you know, you should be fired from your job. You know, they should run you out of business. Whatever. For freedom of speech.

And Americans are losing the understanding, on both sides of the aisle, that the only speech that needs protecting is the speech that the majority or those in power don't like. And so we --

BASSEM: Absolutely.

GLENN: And so we have to -- how can you teach Americans that you -- you got to tolerate the stuff you really despise.

BASSEM: Well, actually, I don't think you really need to teach Americans. You have a president to teach. Because the thing is, this is -- as an outsider, as a complete outsider, that is my biggest problem with the current president. It's not because he's -- he's biased against people like me who has skin like me, has an accent like me, or comes from a place like me, because that's kind of like a joke.

My biggest issue with him is that he doesn't understand the concept of becoming a public servant. He is still acting as a celebrity rich guy who doesn't accept criticism.

And you know what really bugged me? Not all -- like, there's a lot of stuff that bugs me about him. But like, this year, when he said, you know what, I'm not going to the correspondent dinner. I'm not going to that tradition where every president in the United States since -- the only one who bailed out was Reagan because he was shot, you know. So, you know, he said I'm not going so that you can make fun of me. And this is a tradition that all -- you don't understand outside of America, how the world looks at the correspondent dinner. And it's like, wow, they have a president. He's there. And he's being roasted for a whole night. This is amazing.

And he said, no. I'm not going because I'm above this. And this is his problem. He doesn't understand that it's okay because people voted for him. People are paying his salary because of the tax --

GLENN: So you have -- you have -- you say this kind of -- not about Trump. You say this in your own -- in the documentary about your experience. You talk a little bit about how, you know, these guys -- we have to be able to make fun of our leader.

BASSEM: Absolutely.

GLENN: But that's totally foreign to you.

BASSEM: Absolutely. Absolutely. And the thing is, in the Middle East, it's totally different. It's not like a rich guy who doesn't understand the concept of being a public servant. It's like a whole region that has lived for so long and attached to our system. It's like he's a father, he's the leader, he's the inspirational guru. It is something that you cannot touch. And it starts from a very young age. You can't talk back against your parents. You can't talk back against your teacher. Against your boss. Against -- all the way up to the president.

And this has been engrained in us. So when I went out and I made fun of it, said, oh, that's not appropriate. It's like, all right. So that's not appropriate. But, like, torturing people, jailing people is appropriate?

It's really weird what people would consider is appropriate. Because I've been hearing you, you know, before I went in, and you were saying like Puerto Rico is suffering, and people are talking about like whether we should kneel or not for the flag. It's crazy. It's crazy.

How people are offended by, like, kneeling for the flag, but they're not offended by what's happening to fellow Americans on this island.

GLENN: Bessem Youssef is joining us. We'll continue our conversation. The movie is Tickling Giants. You really need to see it. It's available everywhere. It's really an amazing documentary on the Arab Spring and what was going on with satire and what it takes to tell a joke in the Middle East.

GLENN: We have Dr. Bassem Youssef on, and we're going to run out of time with him, and I could spend two hours with him. But, first of all, let me just say this, Bassem, we have a Muslim Egyptian on our own staff who is a huge fan. His family lives in Egypt. And they are huge fans. And they -- I'm going to get spanked by everybody in the family if I don't say thank you for them, for what you've done in Egypt.

BASSEM: Oh, my God. That's amazing. Thank you so much.

GLENN: So let me -- let me ask you two quick questions. We have very little time left.

You've seen now this whole revolution. You've watched it. Are you optimistic for Egypt and the Middle East?

BASSEM: On the long run, yes. Because it had to be done. It had to be done. You know, in the age of social media and Snapchat and Instagram and instant likes and shares, I think we got used to things have to happen instantly. So we were fooled by, "Oh, my God. We had the revolution in 18 days. Yay, we got Mubarak down. And then, oh, my God, it's going down the drain."

But if you look at history, history doesn't work this way. Look to America, 100 years in, you had the Civil War. And even your revolution just didn't happen in 1976. And then you had the Constitution. You had the Bill of Rights. There was like fights and malicious wars in the streets. And it took them another 100 years -- so it doesn't work this way. Look to Europe. It's kind of like -- I hate to say this, but I think there's a blood tax that humanity has to pay to learn. And we've seen that in Europe. We've seen that in America. We've seen that in Latin America.

GLENN: I think so too.

BASSEM: And I think we will have to pay. We have to pay to learn. We didn't pay our tax yet, and here's the one optimistic thing that's going out of the revolution. Because I know that you're looking at the Middle East right now, and it looks terrible. But there has been -- if you look closely, questioning was not a popular thing.

GLENN: You have 45 seconds.

BASSEM: Yeah. So popular -- people are very popular -- people now are questioning everything. Questioning things about tradition. Questioning about military.

And this is what came out of the revolution, the questioning. And that's a prequel of revolution.

GLENN: Bassem, I would love to talk to you again. And I wish you all the best of luck. I truly believe you are a -- you are one of the bravest people on television anywhere in the world, as you have active -- real active threats from the power structure, no matter who is in power. And it's an honor to speak to you. Thank you so much.

BASSEM: It's an honor to speak to you, sir. Thank you.

GLENN: You bet.

Name of the video that you must see is Tickling Giants.

STU: And the book, Revolution For Dummies: Laughing Through the Arab Spring.

GLENN: Have you seen the documentary?

STU: I've only seen parts of it.

GLENN: It is -- this guy -- I mean, when they're writing comedy and he's like, so-and-so had their father arrested last night because of the show. Are we doing the right thing? It's remarkable.

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.