🧵 1. The American people can’t pretend the European Union’s attempt to extort @elonmusk yesterday—threatening to punish him unless he canceled his plan to interview @realDonaldTrump on X—didn’t threaten to fundamentally change our relationship with longstanding European allies.
2. Fully 22 of the 27 countries that belong to the European Union also belong to NATO, meaning that they benefit from the U.S. security umbrella, and from our obligation under Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty to defend them if they’re attacked.
3. This works out well for Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain.
4. It’s sometimes less of a good deal for the U.S., which has long shouldered a disproportionate share of Europe’s security burden.
5. Those same 22 countries dominate—and certainly have the power to restrain—the EU.
6. Those counties (which control the EU) tried to wield the EU’s regulatory power over a U.S. company to influence our presidential elections—based on the absurd contention that the EU had to act to protect EU citizens from misinformation.
7. They tried to help Kamala Harris by depriving Donald Trump of an opportunity offered to both Trump and Harris (but accepted by Trump and declined by Harris): a live interview with @elonmusk on X—one of the few channels of information in America that isn’t “all in” for Harris.
8. How can we ignore that 22 of our European allies, acting through the EU, are trying to interfere with and affect the outcome of our presidential elections?
9. When we put American blood and treasure on the line—as we do by honoring our NATO commitments—that should mean something. At a minimum, it should mean that they won’t extort U.S. companies to interfere with our presidential elections.
10. What do you think this should mean for the future of NATO, and U.S. involvement in it?
11. Our often-unreciprocated security assistance to these European allies makes it easier for them to do other things with their money—like funding extravagant welfare-state programs and the EU, which has now been weaponized against us to influence our presidential elections.
12. Europe had a good thing going—we pay for their security (far more of it than we should) so they can do whatever they want.
13. With the “whatever they want” approach culminating in what happened yesterday—with @ThierryBreton trying to extort @elonmusk to help Kamala Harris defeat Donald Trump—the EU has now offended at least half of American voters. (I hope it’s more than half, given that this should bother Democrats too).
@ThierryBreton @elonmusk 14. Imagine what would’ve happened if the EU had tried to do this four years ago to help Donald Trump and hurt Joe Biden. I know, it’d never happen that way, but imagine the outcry if it did. The media would be incensed and outraged over this. They’d have spoken of little else.
@ThierryBreton @elonmusk 15. And yet what is the MSM saying about this? Basically nothing.
@ThierryBreton @elonmusk 16. This is a good time for Americans—despite what they’re hearing, or not hearing, from the media (and regardless of their political ideology)—to stop and think about what this outrageous act by the EU should mean for America and her interests in Europe.
@ThierryBreton @elonmusk 17. If the EU’s attempt to extort a U.S. company in an obvious effort to influence the U.S. presidential election isn’t cause for U.S. to re-evaluate our relationship with our European allies, I don’t know what is.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵 1/ No other success a country enjoys—economically, intellectually, technologically, or otherwise—can compensate for a collapse in that country’s birth rate, which culminates in unmitigated societal demise
2/ Low birth rate and population collapse leads to extinction
3/ Human extinction cancels all other human advances—in knowledge, wealth, prosperity, and every other achievement
🚨🧵 1/Repost if you think this is yet another good reason to end universal mail-in voting
2/ USPS unions like the National Association of Letter Carriers (NALC) & American Postal Workers Union (APWU) routinely endorse presidential candidates
Both NALC and APWU endorsed Kamala Harris in 2024 & all postal-worker unions overwhelmingly favor Democrats when they endorse
3/ This creates at least a potential conflict of interest, given that USPS handles tens of millions of mail-in ballots with each election—99.22 million in 2024 alone
If a union backs one candidate, could that influence ballot handling?
1/ Utah is a Republican state—one that has been served by exclusively Republican governors for decades. And we’ve had decades of Republican majorities in both chambers of the legislature. Why, then, does Utah have a number of avowed leftists serving in its judicial system?
2/ Utah’s judicial nomination system is broken. Republican governors often end up naming left-wing judicial nominees who don’t share their views on the proper role of the courts—including basic concepts like textualism, originalism, and judicial modesty. It’s time for reform—to empower the governor to pick judges who align with the governor’s vision.
#UtahJudicialReform
3/ Here’s how it works today: For each judicial vacancy, a nominating commission (one per judicial district, plus an appellate commission for both the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals) solicits and reviews applications each time a judicial vacancy arises. Each commission consists of seven members appointed by the governor. Members of each commission must be U.S. citizens and Utah residents, and may not be legislators.
🧵 1/ The Left’s latest push to “save democracy” is just a rebrand of their war on the Constitution. This @nytimes piece calls for abolishing the Senate, ending the Electoral College, and packing the Supreme Court. Let’s break this down.
2/ The Constitution gives each state equal representation in the Senate, balancing raw majority rule. The Electoral College ensures smaller states aren’t drowned out by big states. These are just two of the many deliberate, counter-majoritarian design features in our Constitution. The Left calls them “undemocratic.” In a sense, they’re right, but that’s the whole point of the Constitution—to restrain government, even (especially) when the majority doesn’t want the government to be restrained. nytimes.com/2025/08/14/opi…
3/ Why? Because these constitutional protections sometimes undermine their agenda. The Constitution isn’t a tool for unchecked majority rule—it’s a shield against it. That’s why I wrote Saving Nine—to show how our Constitution and independent judiciary protect us from mob rule.