Bombshell from Washington: “The EU’s quiet coup in Romania by installing Nicușor Dan. Questions no serious democracy can afford to ignore”
Former PayPal executive David Sacks, appointed by Donald Trump as “Czar” for artificial intelligence and crypto, who also heads a White House advisory council on science and technology, wrote an analysis on his X page about the “EU’s quiet coup in Romania” by installing Nicușor Dan.
A country cannot defend democracy by destroying it. Nor can it combat interference by becoming its own chief saboteur. These are not paradoxes – this is the political reality in post-election Romania in 2025, where the will of the people has been trampled upon by an alliance of technocrats, foreign intelligence pressure, and court orders. This is not democracy, but a simulation of it – a spectacle with controlled outcomes.
The facts
On November 24, 2024, Romanian citizens elected Călin Georgescu, a conservative and independent nationalist, as their favourite for the presidency by a 23% margin in the first round. In any functioning republic, this would have been a clear mandate for a runoff. But the Constitutional Court annulled the result just two weeks later – under massive pressure from the EU – under the pretext of alleged “Russian interference,” for which there was never any convincing evidence.
This annulment was not a legal formality, but a political blow. Georgescu, the people’s candidate, was subsequently barred from re-election due to suddenly initiated criminal proceedings. The charges: “incitement to acts against the constitutional order” – a grotesque pretext often used by authoritarian regimes.
In parts of Europe, it is now a criminal offense to criticize the EU, question supranational power, or advocate for national sovereignty. What remains of freedom of expression?
Simion’s rise and Brussels’ election victory
George Simion, chairman of the AUR (Alliance for the Unification of Romanians), was nominated as a replacement candidate – his candidacy was confirmed by both the Central Election Office and the Constitutional Court. He campaigned openly and achieved almost 41% of the vote in the first round of the new elections on May 4, 2025. His opponent, the EU favourite Nicușor Dan – a technocrat, a man of open borders and Brussels centralism – received only 21%.
Simion had a double-digit lead in the polls before the runoff. The energy on the streets, the crowds, the momentum – everything spoke in his favour. Then came the “surprise”: According to the authorities, Dan won 54% to 46%. From a 20-point deficit to an 8-point victory – with almost identical percentages in every district.
Statistically speaking, this is a warning sign. Is it plausible that a nation as divided as Romania would deliver such a unified election result?
Manipulated information ecosystem
In the weeks leading up to the election, the EU exerted pressure on private platforms to silence critical voices against Dan and the EU. The most explosive revelation came from Pavel Durov, CEO of Telegram: French intelligence had asked him to suppress conservative Romanian channels before the elections. Durov refused – but other platforms likely succumbed to this pressure.
The central question now is: Can a country still be called a democracy if the will of the people is annulled, the leading candidate is criminalized, freedom of expression is suppressed, and elections are monitored and influenced by foreign forces?
The EU presents itself as a defender of liberal democracy – but its actions increasingly resemble what it claims to be fighting: the criminalization of dissent, the “correction” of election results, censorship through platform pressure – this is not law, but administration. Not freedom, but surveillance.
A symptom of a larger problem
This is not a purely Romanian crisis, but an example of the larger ailment of Western democracies: the hollowing out of democratic processes by globalist elites who have no use for national self-determination. When election results don’t meet the expectations of Brussels or Berlin, they are “corrected.” This is government by correction – not by consensus.
Some will argue that the annulment was necessary to prevent outside interference. But what is more invasive – a few bots or a court annulling elections? What is more anti-democratic – online disinformation or a candidate ban?
Conclusion: Destroyed in the rescue
In an attempt to prevent interference, the EU has itself become an interfering power. In an attempt to save democracy, it has destroyed it.
You don’t have to agree with Georgescu or Simion to recognize the bigger problem: Democracy doesn’t mean getting the “right” result. It means allowing the people to vote freely – without censorship, without repression, without foreign influence.
Elections shouldn’t be overturned by people in robes on the orders of people in suits. The voice of the Romanian people was clear in November and May – only legal and media manipulation could stifle it.
The lesson is clear: Democracy needs to be defended even against its self-appointed saviours. When courts annul elections, when intelligence agencies control the media, when foreign powers determine national outcomes – then the term “democracy” becomes just a phrase.
The Romanian people deserve more: truth, genuine elections, a system where words are not crimes and patriotism is not a misdemeanour.
And if they are to regain that republic, it will not be through further appeals to those who undermined it, but through courage, vigilance and memory – because a democracy replaced by staged events will not return on its own.
Author: David Sacks
yogaesoteric
May 21, 2025
Also available in:
Română