Transcription
I gotta say, I think that Donald Trump is a political genius. By having Elon Musk and a lot of people are shocked now, how can I make such a statement? How can I say this claim? And the reason is because I actually followed the first time he ran into office. Do you guys remember, right? Like, does your memory go that far back? Because mine does. And when he was into office the first time around, anything he would tweet, anything he would tweet, the media would be up on his ass. And it was Mean Tweets Non-Stop. And this actually got his approval rating down. The mainstream media constantly focusing on Donald Trump and being like, "Oh my goodness, he tweeted kofifi. What does it mean? Oh, he doesn't know how to type. His mind is leaving his body. He just doesn't know how to use a keyboard anymore." And the thing is, the approval ratings would actually go down from [__] like that. "Oh no, he said that King Jong-un is Rocket Man. He's going to bring World War II. It it's going to lead with North Korea attacking the United States and it's going to drag us into World War II. Trump is a Madman!" Again, that was what the media would do every single time Trump would tweet something. His approval rating would actually go down by a couple of points because it would be like non-stop media coverage.
And so by getting Elon Musk, I don't know if you guys noticed or not, but now Elon is in the center of attention. Like, like he keeps tanking all of the flak that Donald Trump should get. Even when you go on Reddit, which is one of the most unhinged websites on the internet, just a complete activist [__] show. Now everyone already, Reddit is attacking Elon Musk mostly. Like Donald Trump is barely getting any of the flak. He's like some sort of eldritch God, like some sort of eldritch entity that they fear. And and all they get from Donald Trump is like, "I will set 25% tariffs in Canada," and they all [__] their pants after that. "I will decide that the United States shall not defend any of the Nations that do not spend their required amount for NATO," and they freak the [__] out. You know, like they they don't get the same level of humor that they got during the first Administration. They they don't seem really happy and gleeful as when they caught Trump with a mean tweet. No, like now they're taking his tweets seriously. And and the gleefulness seems to be on Elon Musk, right? Like they're constantly attacking Musk. And I honestly think that this is planned because Elon Musk is being a chicky little [__] on purpose. Like he is driving the rhetoric 211. And the only reason that I can think of is specifically to get the media to be outraged. Like he wants to be in the center of attention. He wants to be the distraction. Like, like look at this particular post right there. There's no reason for him to get into this conflict, but he wants to get it because now all the newspapers from Romania all the way to the United States are constantly talking about this specific issue.
So Elon Musk makes a post saying that he challenges Putin to a one-on-one physical combat over Ukraine, and his Starling system is the backbone of the Ukrainian Army. "The entire front line would collapse if I turn it off." Now I generally think that this is not without Merit because there were American Publications back in the day when Elon Musk decided to allow Ukraine to use Starling, praising him for the Starling contribution. In fact, like they said that Starling was Paramount in the war effort because the Russians couldn't turn it off; they couldn't hack it. And so when Elon Musk was accused of working with the Russians, uh, he basically said, "Well, how can I work with the Russians if I gave Starling to Ukraine? Like, how does that make any sense?" Right? So like there is a point that yeah, like Starling is actually pivotal for the war effort in Ukraine. And so Poland most likely views Starling as a matter of National Security because the conflict in Ukraine directly interests the well-being of their Nation. They don't want to border Russia, just like Russia doesn't want to border NATO. Right? No one wants to be Russia, especially not Poland. And so when they uh see Elon's tweet, they take debate instead of actually contacting the Trump Administration behind closed doors and having this conversation in private. They decided to do it in public on Elon Musk's platform, which seems to be a big mistake because this is exactly what he wants. This is exactly why he makes these tweets.
So the Polish foreign minister uh said that Poland is uh paying for Starlink and they may have to seek alternative suppliers if Musk's satellite networks prove to be an unreliable provider, to which Elon Musk responded—and I saw this live when it happened—"Be quiet, man. You pay a tiny fraction of the cost, and there is no substitute for Starlink." And unfortunately, he is right. There is no substitute for Starling. That there could be, you know, if the European Union would drop a little bit, some of that bureaucracy. And by the way, Elon Musk even in the United States had to fight bureaucracy in order to get Starling operational. He had to think of the Dolphins. He had to think of the whales. He had to think of the o—right, no seriously, like he had that interview where he explains all all of the green environmentalist [__] that he had to deal with for a product that now the European Union is coveting. Now it's like, "Well, well, why why don't we have that? Well, you could—I mean, don't don't get me wrong, I I do think there are Brilliant Minds within the European Union capable of launching [__] in the sky, but you guys love those bureaucrats that oh well, we need to think of the horned viper. We need to think of the jumping spider. The Russians don't think to think about that when they're attacking Ukraine, do they? All right, well then you got to deal with Elon Musk. And I know I know it's extremely difficult to deal with Elon Musk. You can't censor him. You can't shut down his Twitter account. Uh, you can't debank him. Uh, you can't do the German thing that JD Vance was talking about, of arresting people that had a little bit too much to think, that posted too many spicy memes. Yeah, you you can't do that [__]. It's silly difficult. And our politicians in Europe, they're not used to debating. They're not used to dealing with a troll. I will tell you how you know. Like usually I should charge money for this uh because it's like Sage advice on how to deal with Elon Musk: ignore the [__] troll. Yeah, I know. Drop your arrogance. Drop your hubris. Stop stop looking at what he is saying. And if you actually want to talk with him, contact the Trump administration because you guys, I I think you have this thing that we pay taxpayer money for, it's called an embassy, right? You can use your Embassy to contact their Embassy and you can have a normal conversation that's not like the [__] show that we have in public. I'm just saying, you know. But what the [__] do I know?
Uh, because uh today I woke up with something extremely interesting. Like look at this [__]. Elon Musk launches a series of attacks on Romania. Now I usually don't panic, but this actually freaked me out. I should sue this newspaper for causing panic and alarm cuz I—if Elon Musk, the richest man on Earth, wanted to attack my country, things would be bad. No, I'm not even kidding. Like I know a lot of people like to think of him as a troll cuz he's on Twitter and he posted the [__], but like think about it this way: if he genuinely wanted to [__] a country, he is the richest man on earth, connected to the MAGA Administration in the United States, right? So it's not just that he has wealth, he has nepotism. And there have been people that aren't as rich as him that have managed to [__] countries. Like if I'm not mistaken, George Soros was at an interview where where he was bragging about how he crashed countries' economies and stuff, right? Elon Musk has more money and influence than George Soros. So like if he genuinely wanted to attack my country, I would genuinely worry. I would be like, "Holy [__]!" But then you read the article and you realize, "Oh, he's not attacking Romania. He's criticizing—" Oh, he's not criticizing Romanians; he is criticizing The Establishment, our politicians. Well, we criticize our politicians all the time as well, right? So like uh why why is this headline the way it is? But apparently he doesn't want to travel to my country anymore because he doesn't feel that safe. To be fair, you know, my assumption—and this is like something that's just my opinion, is not, you know, supported by any evidence—but but my assumption is that the reason Elon Musk visited Romania, not once, but he wanted to visit it twice, is because he probably wants to open some business here. Yeah, I know this is far-fetched and shocking, but I think he's a businessman. It's what he does, right? Like he opens businesses. What type of business? I don't [__] know. Maybe a factory or something, probably with Tesla, maybe something to do with Starlink, you know, maybe with the military. I I don't know. But but is it like really that far-fetched that he wants to invest? That he doesn't want to Second Brazil? Cuz I do think like Brazil triggers him. I think like memories from Brazil are like flashbacks in his mind, giving him PTSD. Cuz what happened with Brazil? Well, he opened business there; he invested there. And then the Constitutional court, with the judge, went like, "Uh, yeah, we're going to shut down your Twitter unless you censor on behalf of us, under the table, unless you become our good lap dog and start censoring people we don't like, uh, we're going to shut down Twitter. And if you keep [__] with us, we're going to start shutting down your other businesses." And eventually he cocked, but I don't think that he wants those flashbacks again. I I don't think he wants to invest in another country that that can do a Brazil 2.0. So if he notices what's happening in my country, yeah, he's probably going to criticize it. And he's like, "What the [__] is up with like the constitutional Court saying which person can and can't run for president? Like what is this madness?" Cuz you got to understand, he's criticizing it from an American point of view. And in America, historically, there have been people that ran for president while in prison. There have been two cases of this. Like in America, you can actually be in prison for a crime, any crime, doesn't matter, and you can still run for president while in prison because that is what democracy means. It means the will of the people. And if the people are aware of the crimes that the person committed and they wanted to vote for him anyway, then the people are saying that we don't care about the crimes or or we don't believe that the crimes are serious enough, or we think the person was persecuted, or whatever, you know, like the people get to vote. And this is what happened with Donald Trump. Donald Trump was also accused with the Russian conspiracy, and he was also arrested and had his mug shot taken, and he still ran, and despite all this, he won. And so this is the man that Romania needs to get on his good side so that we can have American soldiers and NATO bases on our country because with him we have the cards; without him we don't have the cards. It's literally that simple. Like a lot of politicians didn't drill it through their brain yet that Trump is the president of the United States, and his party also owns the House and it also owns the Senate, and SCOTUS is on his side. And so like he is the will of the American people, whether you like it or not. Like you don't have to like him, but you at least need to not piss him off cuz he is genuinely—well, America is genuinely the de facto guarantee of Peace in Europe. Like it is the American Military that protects us from the Russians. It's not the European Union; that's a trade agreement, like that's an economic alliance. NATO is the military alliance, and it is driven by the United States. And so when it comes to Elon Musk criticizing us for saying that we're not in alignment with American values, you're supposed to take that criticism a little bit seriously because it's not just Elon Musk that said it; it's also JD Vance, and I'm pretty sure that's Trump's opinion as well, and Mark Rubio's opinion, and pretty much everyone within the MAGA administration. They all agree that okay, you're getting our military, which means our taxpayer money, but in exchange we want you to have our values.
And so I was shocked when I saw that the vice president of the pro-establishment party, the National Liberals in my country, responding to Elon Musk. And already when I saw when I saw the tweet, I was like covering my face, and I was like, "Please please tell me that you at least didn't add him, cuz I know you said something stupid, but please tell me that at least you didn't add Elon Musk." And then I look, and it's like, okay, he didn't @ Elon Musk. Oh, shoot. So so this guy from the ever Liberal Party uh has said that, "Yes, it is democratic to forbid an anti-semite that's financed by the Russians to run for president. It is democratic to cancel elections that have been uh, turned that that have been affected by the Kremlin. And at the same time, it would be stupid and undemocratic not to do it." The Americans disagree with this thing, and grammatically, like by definition, it doesn't make sense. Democracy is the will of the people. Now if you actually ran a poll in society, right? Like if you went and asked Romanians like, "What do you think about this? Should this guy be allowed to run or not?" And then with that poll you have like 50.1% of the public agreeing with you, then yeah, it would actually be Democratic not to allow him to run. But in the meantime, it seems that you're trying to to save democracy by Banning democracy. How does that make sense? And not to mention, you know, a lot of people, for my take, were saying that I am a pro-Russian. It's like, I I'm sorry, but like Niko Shardan agrees with me. He said that uh George Jesco needs to be beaten at the ballot box. The uh unique candidate, Ken Anones, who also agrees with me on this take, saying the exact same thing. Elena Lasone, the member of the USR, also has my take. So it it actually seems to be that not allowing him to run is like a fringe opinion even among the elites because all the other people that are running for president they're basically saying, "No, like let the ban run. Like sure, we can beat him at the ballot box." So I'm really glad he didn't add Elon Musk with this because I I like like I I keep seeing how Elon Musk is responding to these countries, and it wouldn't have looked good, you know. It it it it's better that you you just keep it in doors. Like I I I know I I I know the narrative. I know what you're going with because he is saying, "We must tell the world the truth." The world already knows. Like the reason for the uh Romanian cancellation of Elections is written in The Guardian, it's written in CNN, it's—I I think even Fox News may have talked about it. Like they know, but the Americans just disagree. Like what do you do then? Like that they understand what you're saying, like that they're aware, they looked at the evidence you provided, they're not convinced. Right? Like am I am I not following this correctly? Am I am I being wrong here when I'm saying this? Like uh at the end of the day, you didn't actually have the court hearing. Like you didn't actually, you know, uh summon Jesco through court, show the evidence, allow him to have his lawyer and contradict the evidence, then allow him to file an appeal. And when all of it is done, you have like a permanent decision which can actually strip his rights to to run for candidacy according to Romanian law, and then no one would have complained. And he had years to do it, but for some reason, right? And not to mention, now the people, especially now, they're aware of the Jesco scandal from the media. They're aware of all the accusations. They're aware of everything, and you still don't trust the people to vote. Why why don't you trust the people to vote? It's like if everyone is now fully aware of everything that Jesco did, now now you can say, "Well, we're not going to allow it because we're afraid of the people and how they would vote," which is fair, you know, like that that would be one talking point. But to say that it's Democratic not to allow the people to vote, I don't think the Americans will understand this. I think they will be baffled. I I think like most Americans would would just—and they they don't even understand the principle, right? Imagine if in the United States, Kamala Harris would have been forbidden to run by the Supreme Court of the United States for saying that she is anti-gun. Like hypothetically speaking, let's say, you know, in an interview she says that she wants to restrict firearms, and then you would have Clarence Thomas from the Supreme Court coming up and say, "Uh, look, we can't allow Kamala to run because uh her job as president would mean upholding the American Constitution, and the American Constitution has the Second Amendment, and her views contradict the Second Amendment, and therefore she can't run." Or if you had the someone like Joe Biden who basically says, "Yeah, we need to crack down on the misinformation and the harmful disinformation uh on social media during the pandemic," and and then the Supreme Court would say, "Yeah, I don't think Joe Biden can run because Free Speech uh includes misinformation and disinformation. Like seriously, read the American Constitution. Like misinformation and disinformation is included in free speech, and because of that uh his views aren't in alignment with the Constitution. We don't believe that he will be able to defend the Constitution if he is President," blah blah blah blah blah. How do you think the American people would react? Like is that democracy? That that's an entirely new political system. I'm not saying it's not sustainable. I'm not saying it might not be good, you know, like maybe maybe it's actually a really amazing system that people haven't tried yet uh but uh it's not Democratic. Like democracy isn't when before an election you have bureaucrats that aren't voted in by the public and uh they get to pick a couple of names and they say, "Yeah, we don't like these people because the mainstream media doesn't like it, and the prosecutors have opened some investigations on them. Like we don't know the finality of those investigations. Maybe maybe it sticks, maybe it doesn't, but who [__] cares? The accusation is enough. They're not going to run." And you don't see the danger of a president, like you don't think that the National Liberals are going to suffer from the same [__] maybe 10 years down the line, 20 years down the line? Who [__] knows, you know? Like do you think if AUR manages to win the Parliamentary elections next time they're not going to do this to you? Like we're already seeing it being done in the United States. Like Trump is using Dodge, which is a reband program that Obama created. Like he's using the Democrat [__] that they created for themselves against them. And so like if AUR manages to win the Parliamentary elections, of course they're going to do this to you. Their electorate will demand that they do this to you. It's like put judges in the Constitutional court that agree with you, and and they can crack down on the opposition, and we can figure out reasons. That's fine, you know, maybe it's not the Russians, maybe it's a pandemic or some [__], like whatever the case, whatever people are afraid during that particular time period, like 10 years, 20 years from now, whatever the [__] that will be, you know, just say that, "Oh well, they're against the Constitution." Just just find any statement that they had in the last five or six years, whatever they went to the podcast and said, saying off the cuff, take that statement, give it to the Press, make the Press talk about it constantly, uh have some prosecutors open a couple of files on them, and then we have enough reason to uh prevent them from running. This is it. This is not Democratic again, you know? It's a new system. Maybe it's a good system. Who knows? Uh, but what I do know is that hopefully the next president of Romania is going to have the political Savvy, Charisma, wisdom, and intelligence to justify this to the Americans, cuz the Americans seem upset, and you know, I don't really blame them. I mean, they're investing a lot of money in our country, right? With with the defense, it's uh the lives of American soldiers as well, and they want to know that there is stability here, right? That we have a system strong enough in order to work even if a crazy person manages to become president for 10 years. I personally think that we had Jesco for three terms, and the country is still here. So at the end of the day, if you generally want democracy, you have to accept that at some point some person that you don't like, maybe even some person that's mean-spirited, is going to become president, but you still need to have the nation functioning, right? Like look at the United States. They had horrible presidents in the past; they're still there. And so our country needs to have like strong systems that allow for free elections, and after the person won by the will of the people, there are still checks and balances so that he's not a tyrant, he can't exercise all the power, and if he does, there are ways to impeach him. And then you'd even have American Support, by the way. Like if you allow for someone to become president and then he does like really nasty stuff, the Americans would support you, right? Like he he broke the Constitution, he broke the law, we need to stop it. Yeah, like that that that's a different conversation, but to not even allow the person—Jesco—I hate the fact that they're making me defend George Jesco nonstop. I don't like the guy, seriously. I think he's a charlatan. Like the the the last person that I want to defend, but I am concerned about the future, and I am concerned about the relationship between my country and the United States, and most importantly, I am concerned about the future of the country. I want free and fair elections, and and I I don't think that this is a one-off. Like what guarantee do we have that this is a one-off and it will not happen again? Like the next elections, instead of like two people not being allowed to run, we're going to have like four or five, or or that the next time someone that's not from the Social Democrats or the National Liberals are going to run and they're going to win uh the the first term, they're going to redo the elections again on the second. Like like what what are the guarantees? What how do we know as people that they're not even talking about it? This is what frightens me. Like no one seems to be concerned about it. No no one seems that cancelling elections is an extraordinary thing. The only people that do think that are maybe Americans and the higher-ups. So it is what it is. I ended up ranting uh I'm sorry, it's just that you know this is very emotionally charging in my country. The television is making sure that I'm emotionally charged, especially with articles like "Elon Musk is attacking Romania." It's like, no, he's criticizing the rulership. He's criticizing the elites; that's what he is doing. He's not attacking anything. Uh, let me know what you guys think though, and as usual, I will see you in the comment section. Thank you.