“Cancellation” of Romanian Election Results Highlights Political Corruption

by Kenneth Schmidt

Kenneth Schmidt highlights the Romanian court’s cancellation of the presidential election as a blatant example of establishment corruption, exposing how accusations of “Russian collusion” are weaponized to undermine nationalist candidates like Călin Georgescu, even as public trust in such tactics continues to erode.

The recent “cancellation” of the first round of the Romanian presidential election by the Romanian court system is yet another example of how political establishments in European countries will commit any kind of dirty deed to hold onto their power. Călin Georgescu, an independent national-conservative candidate, came in first place in the presidential contest and was preparing for the runoff against a liberal candidate, Elena Lasconi, when the Romanian courts declared the election invalid.

The reason for the court’s alleged “concerns” was that Romanian Intelligence produced a “report” that the Russians were behind Georgescu. Nobody believes this nonsense. Even Miss Lasconi of the Save Romania Party, who was to be Georgescu’s upcoming opponent in the runoff, denounced the actions of the court and told the media, “Today is the moment when the Romanian state trampled over democracy. God, the Romanian people, the truth and the law will prevail and will punish those who are guilty of destroying our democracy.” Even the Western media, always willing to tell lies in order to block a nationalist from gaining power, has been using relatively restrained language in reporting this story because they know the corruption stinks to high heaven.

The ordinary man on the street in Europe and North America has already begun to figure out the “Russian collusion” scam. There was a time when false charges of being a “Russian asset” did have some power. However, over time, it’s been overused to the point of absurdity. The Clinton campaign in 2016 had a man with a British intelligence background gin up a phony report on Donald Trump being compromised by the Russians. Fifty retired CIA/FBI/NSA officials signed a petition that Trump was a “Russian asset.” Ms. LePen of National Rally in France and the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party have been accused of being pro–Russian. Ex-congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, nominated by Trump to be Director of National Intelligence, is still being called a Russian asset. It’s become so ridiculous that anyone who dissents from the establishment narrative on Ukraine, even to the most nuanced degree, gets called some kind of Russian spy.

It’s ironic that in the US, certified members of the Left, who in their youth condemned the tactics of anti-Communist crusader Senator Joseph McCarthy in rooting out Red cells in the government in the postwar period, are engaging in tactics that would make “tail-gunner Joe” blush. At least McCarthy went after real Communists, or those who belonged to Communist front organizations founded by Comintern types. Now, anyone who doesn’t show sufficient anti-Russian zeal gets saddled with the pro-Russian label. The good news is that no one is buying that scam anymore. People simply shrug off the lies now.

The Romanian political establishment, who for years gorged themselves on EU cash, while their citizens have lived in near-poverty, is now discredited. It is hilarious, if it weren’t a massive tragedy, that EU membership was sold to the Romanian people as a magic wand that would transform the country, bringing it, painlessly, into Western European levels of prosperity, without having to actually have a rational plan for economic development. The same thing has happened in some of the other ex-Warsaw Pact states. All EU membership made possible was for large numbers of Romanian citizens to move to Western Europe to find work. Most of these folks would have rather stayed in Romania, but the local economy was stagnant. So, for many, it was either move or live in poverty. This is why large numbers of expat Romanians voted for the three nationalist parties in the parliamentary elections. They would prefer to come home. Anamaria Gavrila, whose Party of Young People got over 6% in the legislative races, is an example. She had to live in the West for years before she could return home.

One poll I saw has Mr. Georgescu winning the now-cancelled runoff 63% to Lasconi’s 37%. However, now that they are going back to square one, one can’t really predict any outcome. The people of Romania are clearly upset with their political leadership. My best guess is that the Romanian people are in no mood for any more election shenanigans. Some nationalist leader is going to gain power in that country; it’s just a matter of time.