FACT CHECK: Is Germany Shutting Down Its Tesla Plant?
A viral post shared on Facebook claims Germany is purportedly shutting down its Tesla plant. Verdict: False The claim originally stems from a March 24 article published by readtime.com. Content detection scans using GPTZero and QuillBot indicate the article text has been generated using artificial intelligence (AI). Fact Check: Kerri Pouliot said she has “no […]
No More Mixed Signals: Europe Needs To Spend More on Defense—and Soon
The news that senior members of the Trump administration's foreign policy team inadvertently invited a critical journalist onto a group chat that discussed the Yemen bombing campaign has roiled Washington. After two months of disruption, the Beltway is settling into its first classic scandal of this presidential term. But while Americans argue about classification standards and parse the precise distinction between "war plans" and "attack plans," the rest of the world focuses on what the conversation reveals about the administration’s attitudes toward them. Europe is confronting the depths of Trumpian disdain revealed in the texts. Some countries are making important progress on defense. The question is if it will be enough.
The post No More Mixed Signals: Europe Needs To Spend More on Defense—and Soon appeared first on .
How NATO’s ‘model intervention’ shattered Libya and Europe
In 2010, Muammar Gaddafi made a dire prediction about Europe’s future. While negotiating a deal with Italy to prevent African migrants from using Libya as a gateway to Europe, he warned: “Tomorrow, Europe might no longer be European … as there are millions who want to come in. … We don't know if Europe will remain an advanced and united continent or if it will be destroyed, as happened with the barbarian invasions.”
A year later, Gaddafi was dead. His removal during an Arab Spring uprising created a power vacuum in Libya, allowing nearly a million migrants from Africa and the Middle East to cross the country unchecked into Europe — just as he had foreseen. Years later, the Migration Policy Institute described Libya’s continued instability, stating: “Post-Gaddafi, the trade and extortion of human beings became a central source of income for communities in Libya, often to the migrants’ detriment.”
No territorial body — whether in Africa, Europe, or anywhere else — can truly function as a nation without securing its borders.
At the peak of the migration surge into Europe in 2015, Libya became a primary transit point, with nearly 200,000 migrants per year making the journey. Smugglers charged between $5,000 and $6,000 per person to cross the Mediterranean on unsafe dinghies. Many landed first on the Italian island of Lampedusa before continuing to welfare-rich destinations like Germany and Sweden.
That same year, a separate wave — the “European migrant crisis” — unfolded, likely influenced by Libya’s collapse. This migration, largely over land, passed through the Middle East, Turkey, and Greece before reaching Germany, where then-Chancellor Angela Merkel welcomed the influx.
The 15th anniversary of Gaddafi’s warning is also a reminder of NATO’s direct role in his downfall. The U.S.-led alliance, facing unprecedented criticism from the current White House, orchestrated the dictator’s removal in 2011. The Arab Spring provided a pretext to eliminate a longtime regional obstacle, setting the stage for the chaos that followed.
Libya remains far from recovery and needless to say has not transitioned into a Western-style democracy. Instead, it resembles a slightly less chaotic version of Iraq, marked by deep tribal and factional divisions. However, a 2017 agreement between Italy and the Libyan coast guard has significantly reduced migrant crossings from Libya to Europe. Meanwhile, rising foreign-led terrorism and organized crime in Germany and Sweden have bolstered the appeal of right-wing populist movements.
NATO’s removal of Gaddafi, once hailed as a “model intervention” by Foreign Affairs, exposed the fundamental flaw of nation-building — failing to account for the vacuum left behind (or, really, just the folly of nation-building itself).
More than a decade later, Libya, like Iraq and Syria, remains fractured not just along political lines but also by tribal and ethnic divisions. Under Gaddafi, Libya had been both a destination and transit hub for migrants, particularly black Africans seeking work in the oil industry. After his fall, many became victims of racial violence and even enslavement by local militias and Islamist groups.
Barack Obama later admitted that failing to plan for Libya’s post-Gaddafi future was his “worst mistake” as president. Reflecting on the crisis, he noted that any stable government must first control its own borders. Given the source, the irony is unmistakable. But the point remains: No territorial body — whether in Africa, Europe, or anywhere else — can truly function as a nation without securing its borders.
FACT CHECK: Germany Did Not Threaten To Cut Ties With The US
A post shared on Facebook claims Germany threatened to cut ties with the United States. Verdict: Misleading Baerbock did not threaten to cut relations with the United States. Fact Check: Social media users are claiming that German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock threatened to cut diplomatic ties with the United States. One user wrote, “AFP: German Foreign Minister […]
FACT CHECK: Video Shows Incident In Hungary, Not Muslim Immigrant In Germany
A video shared on X claims to show a Muslim immigrant trying to stop a tram in Germany. Muslim immigrant in Germany tries to stop a tram so he can pray in the middle of the street. What would you call this? pic.twitter.com/gLzHkAuWej — Dr. Maalouf (@realMaalouf) February 27, 2025 Verdict: False The incident took place […]
To Europe’s leaders: We aren’t drifting away from democracy — you are
Dear esteemed leaders:
I write to you as an American commentator who has long studied the histories of our respective nations and the principles that have shaped the modern world. Your recent remarks, exemplified by German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock’s warning to the United States about its alleged failure to support liberal democracies, compel me to respond — not out of antagonism but out of a shared concern for the democratic ideals we once jointly championed.
I respectfully submit that Europe, rather than exemplifying liberal democracy, is drifting toward a system that bears troubling parallels to the authoritarian regimes it once overcame. Allow me to outline this case with clarity and evidence with the hopeful aim of fostering mutual understanding.
Are you honoring the principles we fought for together?
Liberal democracy, as articulated by thinkers like John Locke and fortified through centuries of struggle, rests on the people's sovereignty, expressed through free speech, free elections, and accountable governance. Yet, across Europe, we observe a troubling erosion of these pillars.
In Germany, citizens face prosecution for questioning state policies on gender or immigration. Speech deemed inconvenient is silenced under the guise of protecting social order. The United Kingdom has detained individuals for silent prayer near abortion clinics, a stark infringement on both expression and conscience. Sweden imposes penalties for critiques of religion, narrowing the bounds of public discourse. These are not isolated incidents but symptoms of a broader trend: the suppression of dissent, once a hallmark of the Soviet system, not the Europe that triumphed over tyranny.
Elections, the bedrock of democratic legitimacy, have also been undermined. Ukraine’s indefinite suspension of voting, however justified by conflict, sets a precedent that weakens its democratic fabric. Romania’s recent nullification of an election result — because a sovereigntist party prevailed — suggests that outcomes displeasing to the European establishment may be discarded. In Germany, discussions to ban the Alternative für Deutschland, a party with significant public support, reflect a willingness to override the electorate’s voice.
This behavior is not one of a confident democracy but of a system fearful of its own citizens — a system reminiscent of the Eastern Bloc’s “managed” elections, not the vibrant pluralism that defined postwar Europe.
Globalist policies that bypass democracy
Further compounding this drift is the imposition of policies that lack a democratic mandate. The aggressive pursuit of climate goals and environmental, social, and governance frameworks often bypasses public consent and is driven instead by unelected bodies and elite gatherings like the World Economic Forum in Davos. These initiatives, while framed as moral imperatives, impose sweeping economic burdens — rising energy costs and shuttered industries — without clear electoral backing.
Historically, centralized control over vast swaths of life, unchecked by the people, was a feature of the Soviet Union’s command economy, not the free societies that rebuilt Europe after 1945. The parallels are not exact, but they are unmistakable.
The United States is not without fault. Our own democracy has faced its trials — overreach, elitism, and polarization among them. Yet in November 2024, we held an election, and the American people chose a path of renewal, reaffirming government by consent. This stands in contrast to Europe’s trajectory, where the will of the people is increasingly subordinated to the priorities of a technocratic class.
Is history repeating?
History offers a sobering lens. Europe’s leaders in the 1930s failed to recognize Adolf Hitler’s rise, not because they lacked elections, but because they tolerated the erosion of liberty under the pretext of stability.
Force, fear, and expansive state control supplanted democratic norms then as they risk doing now under different banners. The United States played a pivotal role in dismantling that fascism and, through the Marshall Plan, rebuilding your nations — not to enable new autocracies but to secure liberty’s foothold. With that legacy in mind, I urge reflection: Are you honoring the principles we fought for together?
JD Vance’s remarks at the recent Munich Security Conference underscore this divide. He called for unfettered freedom of speech, the uninterrupted conduct of elections, and an end to U.S. funding of Europe’s state-aligned media — positions grounded in first principles of self-governance. He questioned NATO’s relevance in a post-Soviet world and America’s disproportionate burden within it. He did not espouse provocations but rather rational appeals to adapt to new realities. The elicited dismay from European leaders suggests a growing philosophical rift — not over petty differences but over the essence of democracy itself.
Back to the basics of democracy
I write here as an individual, not on behalf of any institution, but as someone who listens to and speaks with millions of Americans every day through my program. While some in our own country fail to recognize the message, “We the people,” which was sent to our capitals in 2024, leaders across the West mustn’t continue to mistake a movement that simply demands a return to long-established norms of law, order, and the Bill of Rights as “Hitlerian.”
The failure of elites to listen and respond to their people builds dictators. Nascent authoritarians — “baby Hitlers” — are among all of us, waiting in the wings. But by ignoring the will of the people, you water those seeds and, perhaps unknowingly, allow their scope and power to grow.
I harbor deep respect for the peoples of Europe and the United Kingdom, with whom Americans share an enduring bond. Our intent is not to abandon you but to refocus on our own renewal — a task long overdue.
We are stepping back from the role of global enforcer, not out of indifference, but from a belief that each nation must secure its own destiny. NATO, designed to counter a now-defunct threat, requires re-evaluation; its costs, borne heavily by the United States, must align with current needs, not past promises. We will no longer subsidize systems that stifle the very freedoms we once defended together.
I implore you not to misconstrue this as a threat but as a call to mutual accountability. The greatness of our civilizations — yours and ours — stems from the people, not their rulers. The courage of ordinary citizens felled fascism and communism, and their voices must still guide us. I hope we can realign with those founding truths, restoring a partnership rooted in liberty, not lecturing.
With respect and in earnest dialogue,
Glenn Beck
Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.
Musk congratulates German populist party for doubling vote share after de-banking, disarmament, surveillance by authorities
Germany's domestic intelligence agency has spent years surveilling members of the right-wing populist party Alternative for Germany — often abbreviated AFD for its German name, Alternative für Deutschland — over concerns about "extremism" — a politically charged initiative that regional courts repeatedly supported. An administrative court disarmed party members last year, barring them from owning firearms. Leftist activists succeeded in having the party de-banked in July. Hundreds of parliamentarians pushed a motion in January seeking to ban the party outright.
Despite these and other obstacles set before it by the powers that be, the AFD — a party founded in 2013 by free-market economists keen to strengthen German sovereignty — came in second place in the nation's elections Sunday, doubling the vote share it previously won in 2021.
The AFD secured 152 seats in the German parliament, which positions it to block constitutional changes in concert with the Left party as well as to potentially eclipse Friedrich Merz's nominally conservative Christian Democratic Union in the next election. Nevertheless, establishmentarians have tried downplaying the populist party's gains — especially because of Elon Musk's public support for the party.
'Traditional political parties in Germany have utterly failed the people.'
The anti-Trump group MeidasTouch tweeted, "MUSK LOSES BIG IN GERMANY," adding, "Germany's CDU/CSU wins big, while the far-right AfD underperforms in second — despite backing from Elon Musk and J.D. Vance."
The socialist magazine Mother Jones ran a piece titled "Elon Musk’s Bid to Propel Germany’s Far-Right Party to Victory Has Failed," which framed the result as a loss despite acknowledging toward the end that "the results are still an unprecedented success for AfD, whose popularity has grown over the years at the same time as they have succeeded in pushing other German politicians further right."
Musk emphasized ahead of the election that "only AfD can save Germany," stressing that the "traditional political parties in Germany have utterly failed the people." The tech magnate also hosted the party's leader, Alice Weidel, in a 75-minute conversation on X, giving her a boost in early January.
Notwithstanding the liberal spin in the wake of the election, AFD secured 20.8% of the vote, crushing outgoing Chancellor Olaf Scholz's liberal Social Democratic Party, which nabbed only 16.4% of the vote.
Merz's CDU and its sister party together received 28.6% of the vote — enough for first place but not enough to avoid exposure to tactical AFD challenges in the next national election. In the meantime, however, the establishment parties have agreed on a "firewall" to keep the AFD out of the ruling coalition that forms in the days and weeks to come.
Musk congratulated Weidel on her party's performance, noting that AFD "will be the majority party by the next election."
President Donald Trump congratulated the CDU, noting on Truth Social, "LOOKS LIKE THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY IN GERMANY HAS WON THE VERY BIG AND HIGHLY ANTICIPATED ELECTION. MUCH LIKE THE USA, THE PEOPLE OF GERMANY GOT TIRED OF THE NO COMMON SENSE AGENDA, ESPECIALLY ON ENERGY AND IMMIGRATION, THAT HAS PREVAILED FOR SO MANY YEARS."
While not as aggressive as the AFD, Merz's CDU has indicated that it will crack down on unchecked migration, curb regulations, and seek changes to spur economic growth, reported the New York Times.
However, whereas AFD has advocated for a negotiated end to the war in Ukraine and criticized continued aid to the embattled nation, Merz has staked out a hawkish position, reportedly stating that he would not accept a deal struck between the U.S. and Russia "over the heads of the Europeans, over the heads of Ukraine," and promising to provide long-range Taurus missiles to Kyiv.
"My top priority, for me, will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that we can gradually achieve real independence from the U.S.A.," Merz said ahead of the election. "I would never have thought I'd be saying something like this on TV, but after last week's comments from Donald Trump, its clear that this administration is largely indifferent to Europe's fate, or at least to this part of it."
This so-called "independence" will likely cost Germany a pretty penny, at least if it expects to fill America's shoes in the way of financer. Extra to approving hundreds of billions of dollars in aid to Ukraine along with over $65 billion in military assistance, the U.S. has paid the most for defense in NATO.
Merz has also characterized Trump as an "admirer of autocratic systems," suggesting that his recent criticism of Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskyy amounted to the adoption of Kremlin rhetoric.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Incoming German Chancellor Says Netanyahu Can Visit Germany, Defying ICC Warrant
German chancellor-designate Friedrich Merz said Thursday that he will make sure Benjamin Netanyahu can visit Germany without being arrested, taking a stand against the International Criminal Court's arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister.
The post Incoming German Chancellor Says Netanyahu Can Visit Germany, Defying ICC Warrant appeared first on .
If Anything, J.D. Vance Was Polite To Europe
Get the Conservative Review delivered right to your inbox.
We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.
Today's top stories