From Finland with Fire: Joni Takes on Musk's Disinformation

This podcast episode features an engaging discussion on the alarming rise of disinformation, particularly in the context of Donald Trump's potential return to power and his controversial nominees like Tulsi Gabbard and Pete Hegseth. Hosts Colonel Mo Davis and David Wheeler explore the implications of these developments, emphasizing the need for accountability and integrity in leadership roles. The conversation extends to the geopolitical landscape, highlighting the perspectives of Yoni, a guest from Finland, who shares insights on Russia's actions and the importance of supporting Ukraine. As they navigate the complexities of current political dynamics, the hosts also address the challenges of combating disinformation in an era where social media plays a crucial role. This episode serves as a call to action for listeners to remain vigilant and informed in the face of ongoing political and social upheaval.

Episode 1:

Hosts: Col. Moe Davis & David B. Wheeler, Co-Founders, American Muckrakers

Guest: Joni Askola, Finland

• Trump and Greenland, Panama Canal, Canada and Gulf of America
• GOP trying to steal a NC Supreme Court election
• NC Dem party is dead
• Joni Askola versus Elon Musk
• Joni's work for Ukraine
• Finland vs. Russia

In the debut episode of Muck You, Colonel Mo Davis and David Wheeler navigate the turbulent waters of contemporary American politics, offering a platform for critical discourse in a time of rising disinformation and political turmoil. The hosts reflect on their experience with American Muckrakers, where they targeted figures like Madison Cawthorn and Donald Trump, and they express a shared commitment to shedding light on the truth. As they unpack the current political landscape, Mo and David discuss the overwhelming control of the far right, the frustration felt by everyday citizens, and the urgent need for truthful information to counteract the pervasive misinformation that dominates public debate.

The conversation takes a critical turn as the hosts delve into Trump's erratic behavior and his proposals that threaten established international norms. Mo articulates his concerns regarding Trump's remarks about NATO allies and the implications for global security. They explore the potential appointments of individuals like Tulsi Gabbard and Pete Hegseth to key positions in the government, questioning their qualifications and the broader impact these choices could have on national security. The hosts draw on their military backgrounds to emphasize the importance of competent leadership in the armed forces, making a compelling case for the need to prioritize integrity and qualifications over loyalty to Trump.

The episode also features an engaging discussion with Joni, a Finnish activist who recently found himself at the center of a controversy involving Elon Musk. Joni shares his experiences of backlash and online harassment following his criticism of Musk's comments about immigrants, highlighting the real-world consequences of standing up against powerful figures in the age of social media. As he discusses his activism in support of Ukraine, Joni emphasizes the moral imperative to defend democracy and sovereignty against authoritarianism. This episode of Muck You serves as both a critical analysis of the current political climate and a call to action for listeners to engage with the truth and participate actively in the democratic process.

Takeaways:

• The podcast introduces the new venture of Muck You, which aims to discuss current political issues and provide insights on the actions of notable figures like Trump and Musk.
• Mo Davis and David B. Wheeler reflect on the frustrations felt by citizens under the current political climate, highlighting the need for truthful information.
• The hosts express concern over Trump's potential military threats against NATO...

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Foreign.
Welcome to the first episodeof Muck you, hosted by Colonel Mo
Davis and myself, David B.
Wheeler.
Thanks for agreeing to be partof this crazy thing, Mo.

(00:20):
I'm happy to do it.
For folks that don't know, Moand I started American muckrakers
spring of 2021 and we've beengoing strong ever since then, banging
on Madison Cawth, LaurenBoebert, Elon Musk, Donald Trump,
Mark Robinson and others.
And we thought it was time tojump on board with a podcast so we

(00:40):
can annoy everybody with our opinions.
We bring a little newinformation to light similar to what
we've done with American Muckrakers.
Obviously a dearth of podcastsout there, but we're hoping that
we can build an audienceinterested in some of the more leading
edge, cutting edge things thatwe've done with Muckrakers.
So we have started thispodcast and we will have various

(01:02):
guests on.
Our guest today, a gentlemanfrom Finland who had the temerity
to take on Elon Musk.
Again, I want to welcome my cohost, Mo Davis.
Just happy to be here.
And now I've had a lot offolks, the far right's taken over,
you know, control of the WhiteHouse, the Senate, the House, the
Supreme Court and the media.
And folks are just frustratedand feeling powerless.

(01:25):
There's nothing that, youknow, they can do to push back.
So I think this is one way wecan do that.
You know, we can put someinformation out there that's truthful,
kind of like leading a horseto water, you can't make it drink.
You know, all we can do is tryto get the information out there
in a truthful way andhopefully it'll sink in with some
that, you know, they've beenfed a steady stream of lies for too

(01:46):
long and it's got us to wherewe are today.
And I know we can, we can do alot better than where we are.
So what are your thoughts onall this bullshit that Trump's trying
to pull?
I got a range of feelingsabout it.
One is it's, who would havethought that America would be in
the place that it is todaywhere, you know, we were the leaders
and after World War II andforming NATO, a mutual pact of self

(02:09):
defense that, you know, bindsall the signatories to come to the
aid of others if they're attacked.
And here we are threateningmilitary action against one of our
NATO partners, Denmark, whoowns Greenland and the Panama Canal.
I mean, we entered into atreaty decades ago and now again,

(02:29):
Trump has said, you know, hewants to take it back.
And, you know, who knows the rationale?
I mean, I certainly have noinsight into how Donald Trump thinks
or even if he does think.
But it would appear to me thatpart of this, part of this strategy
may be to.
I mean, this is what peopleare talking about right now, rather
than talking about whatdeplorable nominees he's put forward

(02:50):
to fill the highest offices inthe country.
You know, people like PeteHedge, Seth, to be the Secretary
of Defense, who's just, numberone, totally unqualified and number
two, lacks the integrity forthe job.
Or Tulsi Gabbard, who might aswell be on Putin's payroll to serve
as national security advice.
Again, you know, people aren'ttalking about those nominations and

(03:12):
their confirmation hearingsare coming up next week.
You know, out of the blue,Trump throws out this nonsense about
taking Greenland and renamingthe Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of
America.
And if you recall, the bigissue in the election was the price
of eggs.
So I don't see where any ofthis crap does a damn thing about
egg prices.

(03:32):
You think he's serious aboutany of this at all?
I think he would.
I think, again, he's taking apage out of.
I mean, look at what China andRussia are doing.
You know, China, you know, foryears now has been a threat, you
know, to their neighborsseeking more territory.
And, you know, Russia goinginto Ukraine, which, you know, if
they get away with it there.
I think it's just the firststep in a broader plan.

(03:55):
And I think Trump wants tofollow his.
You know, he idolizes dictatorlike, you know, like Putin.
And, you know, perhaps that'swhat he's trying to imitate them.
You know, they're on the landgrab, so maybe, you know, he should
be, too.
But again, I think part of itis that disinformation campaign to
take attention away from otherimportant issues by throwing out

(04:16):
and just slinging crap like hedoes to distract the media and the
public.
You with the militarybackground as well, I don't think
he has any clue what it wouldtake to invade.
To invade Greenland.
I mean, I served in themilitary for 25 years.
And afterwards, I mean,particularly when I was on the faculty
at the law school at Howard,you know, I encouraged young people

(04:38):
consider a military careerthat I found it to be a really good
fit for me.
Felt like, you know, I got upevery morning and I was doing something
that mattered.
I wouldn't recommend that nowbecause, you know, who the hell knows
what Trump is going to do withthe military and he's talked about
using it to, you know, roundup people here in the US which should
be a violation of the PosseComitatus act.

(04:58):
But, you know, since MAGAcontrols the Supreme Court, who knows
what they would say about that.
Again, threatening our NATOpartners, you know, with military
action.
So at least for the next fouryears, I wouldn't encourage anyone
to consider a career in themilitary until we have a commander
in chief who's competent.
You know, I've said this anumber of times before.

(05:19):
It's ridiculous that we have acommander in chief who can't meet
the minimum standards that wedemand of 18 year olds that are walking
into recruiting stations today.
You know, you can't be an E1,but you can be the commander in chief
and have the nuclear codes andit's just.
Do you go back a few years?
Would be hard to fathomAmerica being in the place that it's

(05:40):
in today with someone asmorally reprehensible and incompetent
and corrupt.
Is Donald Trump about to stepback into the White House and resume
the role of Commander in chiefof the Armed force?
It's really a sad stateaffairs and don't want to belabor
the negative too much, but howthe fuck did we get here?
I mean, if you think about it,you know, this country has had a

(06:04):
long history of, you know,leadership in the White House.
And then Trump, you know, wasa bump in the road, we all thought,
but here we are again back onthat road.
How and the did we get here?
Yeah, it's, it's bizarre.
I, you know, in my 25 years inthe military, we had Democrats in
the White House, we hadRepublicans in the White House.
And you know, never in myentire career did I ever, I mean,

(06:26):
there were, I had policydisagreements with, you know, everybody
that ever served as commanderin chief.
There are things that I wouldhave done differently, but I never
once questioned whether theyhad my back.
I certainly question that withDonald Trump, you know, who only
seems interested in one personand that's himself and could care
less about anyone else.
So you're right.
It's.
You would have thought lasttime around was a warning.

(06:49):
It's like somebody had said,no, you know, if the first movie
sucks, usually the sequeldoesn't get better.
So.
And I friend, I'll admit, youknow, in 2008, when Barack Obama
won, you know, I thought thatwas a watershed moment, you know,
where we had turned a cornerand, you know, I forgot who came
up with the.
I guess it was Reagan.

(07:10):
That new day in America.
And I thought it was a new dayin America and a better day, and
to go from that to.
To where we are now, it's just unimaginable.
So I grossly misread whathappened in 2008.
And then in 2020 when Bidenwon and we got Trump out of the White
House, I thought, you know,thank God we've ended that nightmare.

(07:31):
But then for 77 millionAmericans to say, hey, I want the,
you know, the sexual predator,predator, habitual, lying felon to
lead the country.
I don't know if you remember,like, you know, when you and I were
growing up, if somebody toldyour parents, said, boy, you know,
David and Mo, they actpresidential, that was a compliment.
You know, it was a, you know,a high standard where now, you know,

(07:54):
you got to wonder whether tolet your kids listen when President
Elect Trump talks.
Because, you know, the.
The vulgarity, the profanity,the cruelty, they're just things.
The idiocy.
Yeah, it is.
Yeah, yeah, It's.
If somebody's been in a comafor the last dozen years and they
wake up today, they'llprobably wish they're back in the

(08:15):
coma.
Yeah, exactly.
And, you know, I try andfollow it, and I've got three kids,
so, you know, thinking aboutthe future for them, and I'm just
at a point now where it's,let's survive for the next four years,
get through this nonsense.
You know what?
Frankly, give him whatever thefuck he wants, because he's going
to mess it up.
They're going to be mired inchaos, and why resist?

(08:38):
Why spend any energy?
Because they're going to getit anyway.
They're going to get what theywant with this legislature or with
this Congress and with thisSupreme Court.
So, you know, if he wants toinvade Greenland, I guess go for
it, man.
I'm not advocating we do that,but if he thinks he can do that and
make it happen, God bless you,Go for it, man, because he'll end

(08:59):
up in a tribunal somewhere and.
And screw it up.
And I'm not suggesting that,you know, we just all give up and
give in, but there are somethings that I wish he would try because
he's going to get his asshanded to him.
Millions of Americans thatwanted it bad, and that's exactly
how they're going to get it.
They remind me of a dogchasing a car.
The dog has now caught the car.
And what's he going to do with it?

(09:20):
Because I don't think theyhave a damn clue.
That's like health Care, youknow, they've been wanting to get
rid of Obamacare since beforeit was ever enacted.
And as you heard Trump sayduring the debates, he still, he
has what a concept of a plan,grand ambitions, how they're going
to, you know, reshape the country.
Hey, you've caught the car.
Let's, let's see what you'regoing to do with it.
You know, I also feel the sameway about, you know, some of these

(09:42):
Covid deniers in the past.
If they want to die, I guessdie crazy that we've gotten to this
point.
So, you know, anotherinteresting piece of news which I
think is close to our heartsis this North Carolina Supreme Court
race that is in the news.
Yes, the, I guess as of now,there's only one race in the state

(10:02):
that has not been certified bythe state board of Elections and
that's for the seat on theSupreme Court.
It was, you know, DemocratJustice Riggs running to retain her
seat for challenger wasGriffith, the Republican.
And in the end, Justice Riggswas reelected.
I think it was 734 votes wasthe margin out of the, you know,

(10:23):
5 plus million votes that were cast.
So I mean, it was a, you know,a very thin margin.
And justice or Mr.
Griffith was entitled to arecount and he's had two and both
have confirmed the original result.
But instead what they've doneis there's a, you know, folks want
more information.
There's a good article inProPublica that kind of outlined

(10:45):
it in fairly short form.
But this was a, an electiondenial strategy that was in place
in the event Trump to try todo what they did in 2020 and sow
chaos and doubt about the election.
And so this theory, I believethere's roughly 60,000 votes that
Griffith is trying to gettossed out.
60,000 North Carolinians thatshowed up and voted trying to have

(11:09):
their votes nullified.
His argument is there is arequirement added a few years back
when you register, you have toinclude either your driver's license
number, the last four digitsare your Social Security number.
Voters that he's going afterare people that that information
is not on their form, as manyof them have said, you know, they
provided, you know, to theelection workers, they provided the

(11:30):
information that was requested.
They showed ID when they votedin November.
There there's not a single,not One of those 60,000 ballots has
Griffith, Griffith or theRepublicans shown was a fraudulent
vote.
But it's this trying to sowdoubt about the integrity of the
election.
So anyway, the Republicans,after being dissatisfied with the

(11:54):
outcome of the two recounts,challenged it.
One of the state SupremeCourt, you know, which is, as you
noted, is currently a 5, 2Republican majority.
And again, I don't know thatthere's anything that the Republicans
could do with a 6:1 majority.
They can't do with a 5:2majority, but they'll fight tooth
and nail for that little ounceof extra power, you know, with the

(12:16):
Democrats for too long.
You know, you can look back inprior elections, we just roll over.
You know, when it's over, wesay, hey, you know, we tried, we
did our best.
We can go get a cup ofchamomile tea and, you know, move
on.
But for them, they'll fighttooth and nail for this little bit
of extra they think they'llget by having six seats instead of
five.
On the Supreme Court.
The Democrats, Justice Riggsand her supporters tried to get the

(12:40):
case heard in federal court.
The judge there remanded itback to the state court, Supreme
Court and the court this week,in a 4 to 2 ruling, Justice Riggs
disqualified herself since thecase involves her, which.
And that's the right thing todo with that.
It is.
I'm not sure if theRepublicans would, I mean, if, you
know, recently when, you know,when, when one of the justices, his

(13:02):
father was the author of someof the legislation that was under
review and he said, oh, that,you know, just because it's my dad,
it doesn't disqualify me.
But again, it was the rightthing to do.
But there were two dissentingopinions, one by Anita Earls, who's
the other Democrat on thecourt, and the other was by a Republican
justice on the court who saidthat this undermines confidence in

(13:26):
the electoral process and itdisenfranchises potentially up to
60,000 North Carolinians whodid exactly what they were told to
do to cast a vote.
Right.
And doesn't it, doesn't it begthe question what, you know, well,
what about the rest of the election?
If those, Yeah, I agree.
If a thousand people wereillegitimate votes.
Well, what about thegovernor's race, which wasn't close,

(13:48):
but there were several otherraces that were very close.
And again, this theory hasbeen litigated before and has never
gone anywhere but with our,you know, Republican dominated court.
You're exactly right that ifthese votes don't count in the Supreme
Court race and they shouldn'tcount in any other.
Race, so they couldpotentially be reversing for Attorney

(14:09):
General and the race forlieutenant governor.
Well, who knows?
I mean, I think petition forthat Right.
Yeah.
I think the argument would bethat, you know, those races weren't
challenged timely manner andthey've been certified so that the,
you know, the losers, youknow, have waived their opportunity
to contest it.
But it certainly begs thequestion that, well, if these votes

(14:32):
are invalid in this race, thenhow do they count as valid votes
in other races?
Essentially this Republicanled Supreme Court is trying to overturn
the will of the voters ofNorth Carolina.
Right.
Well, that certainly theyhaven't done that yet.
But by enjoining the stateBoard of Elections from certifying

(14:52):
the outcome, they scheduledoral argument in the case for later
this month.
Soon thereafter, they'll tossthis out and it'll be over and done.
Hopefully.
North Carolinians remembernext time around that, you know,
elections have consequences.
And one of the consequenceswas, you know, our court got stacked
with the Republican justiceswho you're supposed to follow the

(15:14):
rule of law, not, you know,lick your finger and stick it in
the wind and see which wayblows best for your party.
And again, you know, how didwe get here, folks?
You know, it's just crazy thatthis is even a topic of discussion.
And frankly, I believe theSupreme Court here is going to do
it.
There's nothing to stop them.
They have shown they'rewilling to push norms.
It's amazing that we're atthis place.

(15:36):
And frankly, why doesn't theBoard of Elections, which is controlled
by the Democrats still, whydon't they just certify a winner,
do what the Republicans would do?
They would, they would findsome sort of legal angle, whether
it was constitutional or not.
They don't care.
But why is it we can't playthat game too?
I think it's because we, wechoose not to.

(15:56):
Not too long ago, I hadchairwoman of the Buncombe County
Democratic Party got angrywith me and said I was behaving like
a Republican.
And I thought to myself, well,you know, perhaps the Democratic
Party should be behaving morelike Republicans.
So they fight tooth and nailwhere we roll over and, and play
dead.
You know, they go to the matand you know, I'm certainly an advocate

(16:19):
to break the law, but, you know.
You could help make the law in court.
Yeah, well, that's one of thethings, you know, you and I back
in, in 2022, to get rid ofMadison Cawthorn.
We encourage voters here inwestern North Carolina to register
as unaffiliated and then tovote in the Republican primary because
it's small numbers and youknow, if you get enough people, you

(16:42):
can, you Know, you can pickthe winner and in a district where
the number, you know,mathematically it's virtually impossible
to win, rather than getting ahorrible outcome, why not get the
least worst outcome you can achieve?
Not by breaking any rules.
By using the rules.
Right, exactly.
And you remember all the.
We got.
Yeah.

(17:02):
From the existing chair, youknow, the chair at the time of the
Buncombe County Dems who have,I think is pissed off to New York
City since then.
I remember the resistance and,and I remember pundits saying it
won't work because folks hadtried it in Ohio at the behest of
Rush Limbaugh to get rid ofClinton that way and in a primary

(17:24):
there.
And they said it wouldn't work.
Well, actually the pundit whosaid it wouldn't work at Western
North Carolina, ProfessorCooper actually did a study and,
and concluded that about 4,000people re registered as independent
and went and voted in theRepublican primary when the margin
of loss for Cawthorn was 1400 votes.
1200 votes.

(17:45):
Right.
So it did work.
And again, that's not breakingthe law.
That's using the, using therules to your advantage.
And again you and I got, youknow, beat about the head and shoulders
by the Democrats for, youknow, gaming the system.
So you know, the Republicanshave shown they will break the law.
You know, they've done itbefore and it's a matter of record.

(18:08):
Right.
And then they use taxpayermoney to defend themselves because
they usually do it throughofficial, official means.
Well, listen, I, I'm, youknow, I ran for statewide for commissioner
of insurance and I was taggedas a Trump, Trump acolyte, which
is unbelievable.
And my Marine father, Iguarantee you, rolled over in his

(18:29):
grave when he heard that.
But you know, I just.
The Democratic Party in NorthCarolina is dead as far as I'm concerned.
I mean, they're not winning.
They've got a.
You know, I like AndersonClayton a lot.
She's a firebrand.
She raised lots of money, shedid lots of great things and I think
maybe even helped Stein have aveto proof house.

(18:49):
But beyond that, you know,where's the success?
You know, Stein ran a great campaign.
He's a good guy.
He raised a lot.
A shitload of money.
I can't stand his chiefconsultant, Morgan Jackson.
But you know, he had a flawed opponent.
Opponent.
If I think I could have evenbeat Robinson, the guy that made

(19:12):
africanewds.com famous, youknow, Rachel Hunt, great candidate.
I think she earned her wayinto that job.
I'm proud of, proud to know her.
And I think that was a win forthe Democrats.
Jeff Jackson, again, a veryflawed opponent, raised a crapload
of money.
I think Jeff again earned that spot.
But beyond, and you know,beyond Mo.

(19:34):
Mo Green, you know, one Mo Mo.
Another good guy who I got toknow when I was campaigning.
Yeah.
And a hugely, a hugely flawedopponent then.
Exactly.
Again, that, that opponent, ifyou couldn't beat her, then Democrats
ought to just close the doors.
But beyond that, where was the success?
Where was the win with allthat money, all that hype.

(19:55):
No, I agree.
I, I read an op ed in theAsheville Citizen Times a couple
weeks back and you know, Isaid that all the hand wringing that's
going on yet looking forward,it's going to be a steeper climb
because with the Republicansin control of all the levers of power,
you know, we're going to haveto find new and creative ways to
kind of punch through that.

(20:16):
And I said, you know, a lot offolks around here are patting themselves
on the back about, well, youknow, yeah, Trump won, but we got,
you know, Josh Stein andRachel, you know, all those statewide
victories.
And I said, you know, ifanybody deserves a pat on the back
for the Democratic wins andthose, it's the Republicans for putting
up such shitty candidates thatpeople could say, well, I can tolerate

(20:38):
Trump, but I can't tolerateMark Robinson.
So had it been, had it beenDale Falwell or outgoing treasurer,
Republican, I can't imagineStein would have won.
Well, you know, I thinkthere's a reason that the largest
voting block affiliation inNorth Carolina is unaffiliated.
Right.
You know, there are more.
And that's new.
That's new.
In the last year or so.

(20:59):
Yeah, I mean, in the past, theDemocrats had a, an advantage, at
least by, by registrations.
But, but unaffiliated is, youknow, the number one designation
that people choose overRepublican or Democrat.
I mean, there's a reasonpeople don't want to be affiliated
with the Democratic Party orthe Republican Party because they're
tired of the, of the bullshiton both sides.

(21:22):
Right.
And, and I would contend thatthe Republicans or Democrats just
lay down and let theRepublicans run over them.
And the Republicans are like,oh, if you're just, if you're just
going to lay there, yeah, Iguess I will run over you.
Yeah, well, yeah, I've madethat argument repeatedly that, you
know, they come to a kn armedwith an Uzi and we show up with a
quinoa salad.
So, yeah, yeah.

(21:42):
And I met with the sameBuncombe county chair woman when
I was running for commissionerof insurance.
And she, her main concern forme was don't embarrass.
Don't embarrass you in what way?
By beating up my opponent.
And I subsequently, I did notdo well in that primary for a lot
of reasons.
And my opponent, Tasha Marcus,was the better candidate, to be honest

(22:05):
with you.
That's why I lost.
Even during that campaign.
I was told over and overagain, you can't point out the fact
that she sat on a committeethat had oversight in insurance but
didn't introduce one bill theentire time she was on that committee.
And I got holy hell for itbecause I was trying to draw a distinction
between our candidacies and,you know, the Democrat.

(22:27):
I'm just so sick of it, Mo.
I mean, they're just pussies.
I'm sorry.
They're just pussies about alot of these issues.
And a lot of the ways ofcampaigning, they don't realize what
the Republicans are doing.
They're just, they'remanufacturing the truth in a way
that puts Democrats on the defensive.
So it's, it's a double whammy.
Not only are they lying, butthen the Democrats are on the defensive

(22:48):
to defend a lie.
You know, Democratic Party'sdead in, in North Carolina.
I think it's broader than justNorth Carolina.
I mean, if the DemocraticParty can't defeat a candidate as
flawed as Donald Trump, it'sgot problems.
Yeah, I mean, yeah, I think a normal.
Again, if there is such thingas a normal Republican anymore.
Yeah.
But I mean, I mean, here's aguy that, you know, polling was showing

(23:12):
a majority of Americans, youknow, thought he was unfit to anyone
with any sense.
You know, it's patentlyobvious that he's, you know, habitual
liar and corrupt, self servingand he won.
So if the Democrats can't beat someone.
Like Donald Trump with abillion and a half dollars too, by
the way.
Yeah, there needs to be somereal soul searching on the path forward

(23:36):
or they're going to be,they're going to be wandering around
in the desert for a long time.
Yeah, they get this figured out.
I hear you loud and clear.
And I think that's a goodsegue to what we hope to do with
this podcast is to have thesesorts of discussions where it's not
all unicorns and, andstrawberries, gang.
You know, something's got to change.

(23:57):
And listen, Mo and I don'thave any delusions that we think
we know everything, but youknow, we have taken contrary views
and the party has rejectedthem that hasn't stopped and stopped
us.
And we've taken a harderapproach to both of our campaigns.
And I think during the courseof this podcast, subsequent ones,

(24:17):
you know, we'll have guests onthat can maybe share some new ideas
about how to counter some ofthis, whether it's Trump, whether
it's Musk, whether it'sRepublicans or, or others in the
United States and abroad thatwe can bring some new ideas to the
table and, and maybe theDemocrats can adopt some of it and,
and start winning.
So that's what we hope to dowith this podcast.

(24:38):
And, and I would be remiss ifI didn't give you a chance to plug
your book.
You've got a terrific book out.
Yeah, thanks.
I have a book out calledSovereign Oak and it's available
on Amazon.
When the hurricane hit, a lotof the book is historical fiction.
So there are three historicalevents that I use to set the groundwork

(25:03):
for the last part, which is afictional story.
But a lot of the book is basedon the Cherokee belief in the interconnectedness
of everything in nature.
And so a large part of thebook focuses on nature and particularly
trees and water.
And when Helene hit, those arethe things that turned deadly and
destructive.

(25:23):
And I made the commitment thatfor a year I would donate 100% of
whatever I make off the bookto organizations that are helping
with Hurricane helene relief.
Again, 100% of the profitsfrom the books will, will go to hurricane
relief.
And again it's available, it'scalled Sovereign Oak and it's available
on Amazon.com that's.
A terrific book from what I understand.

(25:45):
The author told me it wasterrific and so I'm going to make
sure I get a copy and read itand share it with my friends and
family.
Let me know what you think.
We're gonna little break andYanni from Finland's gonna join us
here.
And on Muck you with ColonelMo Davis and David Wheeler.
We'll be back shortly.
Welcome back to Muck youhosted by David Wheeler and my good

(26:09):
friend Mo Davis.
We've got a guest with ustoday all the way from Finland.
His name is Yanni.
Yanni is a topic du jour inthat our friend Elon Musk decided
to send some, some nastycomments his way.
So Yanni, do us a favor andkind of outline what you said, what
happened and if there's beenany repercussions since then.

(26:32):
Yeah, yeah.
So on I think it was on Sundayevening I'm here in Finland at my
parents summer house and we'veSpent Christmas together and they're
still here.
My family lives in France andwe're just spending a normal Sunday.
And.
And I tweeted something aboutElon Musk, which I do quite often.
It's something I do quiteoften because I tend to post some
threads and tweets aboutthings related to Ukraine.

(26:55):
I fundraise for Ukraine on X.
And I also tend to criticize,for example, Elon Musk for his stance
on Ukraine.
So I just tweeted somethingabout Elon Musk and said that he's
basically turning into thebiggest spreader of disinformation
in the history of humanity andthat the EU should do something about
it because it's not good.

(27:16):
I just posted that the postitself didn't get much reach and
I had some other posts thatday as well.
And I went to sleep and then Iwoke up during the night because
there was the U20 ice hockeyworld Championship and Finland was
playing against the US in the final.
And I watched that and Finlandlost in the.
In overtime.
And then I was sad.
I went to sleep again, andthen I woke up a bit late in the

(27:36):
morning.
And when I woke up, a friendof mine called Alex, who has been
also fundraising for Ukrainewith me, he had sent me a screenshot
of this and he said, well,this happened and he's a funny guy.
So I thought I was some sortof fake photoshopped picture or something.
But then when I went online, Ilooked at the notification and it
was real.
Yeah, it's been quite crazysince, for the last three days because

(27:58):
I've been getting calls fromall directions and been giving a
lot of interviews to theFinnish media, but also to other
medias.
And for example, my fatherturned the radio on a couple hours
ago and you could hear myvoice speaking for like 10 minutes.
And it was something I hadtold on the phone two days ago to
a reporter.
But it's been quite a.
Quite a.
Quite an experience.
I've been getting some morereach thanks to that.

(28:20):
So that's been good.
But at the same time, quite alot of hate mail and threats and
stuff like this, so.
Also some downsides to it, but that's.
That's how it is, unfortunately.
Well, I'm sorry to hear that.
Yeah, I think Mo and I haveexperienced a fair amount of that.
It's usually guys that drivereally loud cars, and we all know.
But we know what that meansabout that person's first personality.

(28:41):
But.
So let's back up one step.
Jan, what was it that you tweeted?
And then what was Musk'sactual response?
Yeah, so I said that Elon Muskis becoming the biggest spreader
of disinformation in historyand that the EU should do something
about it.
Right.
And I said that he's hijackingpolitical debates while doing that.

(29:04):
So.
Which is true.
Which is true, certainly inthis country.
And he's trying to do it in Germany.
And has he tried to interferein Finland yet?
Yes.
So the funny thing is, I don'tthink that it's totally random that
he commented on my postbecause an hour earlier he had posted
something about and aboutimmigrants being more likely to rape

(29:24):
women in Finland than Finns,which is a totally stupid statistic
that he's using because he'scomparing immigrants from Afghanistan
to normal Finns, ethnic Finns.
But the issue is obviouslyimmigrants from Afghanistan are more
likely to be male and they'remore likely to be, let's say between
20 and 40 years old.
So of course they're going tohave a way higher likelihood of doing

(29:45):
these things compared to thewhole population of Finland, which
includes women and old peopleand young people and so on.
So there's some stupidstatistic that he was sharing.
But yeah, he's been doing thatand I posted that on Sunday and he
answered me and he said, Idon't know if I can say it on the
podcast, but he, he said fire away.
He said, you retard, as a comment.

(30:08):
So that was his, that was hisanswer for.
But the funny thing is his parents.
Must be so proud.
So I'm sure they are actually.
Yeah, they probably arebecause I, I've seen some of their
interviews and I think theymight be proud about it.
But it was, yeah, it was a.
I was shocked that he answeredto, that he commented on my post,
but I wasn't shocked about theanswer itself because he doesn't

(30:29):
really, he doesn't get intodiscussions or debates.
He just, it's the classicthing when, when you know you're
wrong, you, you attack theother person.
But you don't, you don't debate.
It's kind of become the, thego to, you know, in the past around
here, you know, picking onsomeone, you know, a mental or physical
disability was taboo.
Exactly.

(30:49):
You know, referring to peopleas being retarded has become a standard
response now with no repercussions.
You know, it wasn't too farback that, you know, that was a career
ender, but that was just astandard right wing response.
Yeah, yeah, no, it's sad.
And I actually, I made A shortvideo about it where I said that
the fact that basically himand his supporters are not trying

(31:11):
to address what I said, butjust insulting, shows that they know
that it's hard to answer thatbecause what I say is true and he's
spreading a lot of this information.
And if you ask his own grok,who is the biggest spreader of misinformation
right now, his name comes up first.
So it's a subject that's a bittaboo for him and I clearly got under
his skin because of that andthat's why he got mad and commented

(31:32):
on it.
But as I've been telling someof the Finnish media, it's quite
pathetic that the world's mostrichest and maybe most powerful man
is spending his nightscommenting and insulting people that
he doesn't know.
Because my message didn't tag him.
I don't follow him, he doesn'tfollow me and I didn't address him
in the message.
So.
So I wasn't talking to him inmy post and still he finds time to

(31:55):
comment on it and insult me.
So I don't know how well he'sdoing mentally, but yeah, now I would.
Assume that energized hisfollowers and supporters to chime
in as well.
Yeah, yeah.
I tried to avoid looking atthe comments and stuff, but they
went hard.
He has a lot of fans and myguess is that some of them are bots

(32:16):
as well.
Yeah, I've become quiteproficient at using the block function
on X.
Yeah, yeah, because you can'treally, you can't debate, you know,
like his comment, you know,you retard.
I mean, you can't reallyrespond to that and debate it.
It's just.
That's their tactic is just togo, you know, the insult route.

(32:36):
Yeah, yeah.
And facts don't matter.
Exactly, exactly.
It's crazy how social media isbecause I don't think that Elon is
such a tough guy live face toface, but he is basically like a
nerd who has so much money andpower that he can do this because
he has bodyguards and so on.
And online it's always easy toinsult people.
But a lot of these people likeElon and his supporters, I think

(32:57):
that face to face they're muchkinder, but online they get this
self confidence that they caninsult and issue threats.
And as I said, I've receivedquite a lot of threats as DMs, Twitter
and Facebook and so on.
And it's unfortunate, but asyou guys said, you've.
You've experienced the sameand that's that's how it goes.
And I think the people whoissue those threats are not the ones

(33:18):
who are going to act on me.
So yeah, that's been my takeis the ones you worry, worry about
are the ones you don't hearfrom because.
Exactly.
Normally the folks that arerunning their mouth, that's about
the extent of, you know, it'seasy to be a keyboard commando in
your basement, but yeah, faceto face is a different story, right?
Very much.
Well, but Yanni, what thesemorons don't know is that conscription

(33:41):
and you've been through thearmy, you've been trained in firearms
and.
Yes, and Finland actually has,you know, a fair amount of hunters
and guns that are licensed and regulated.
So you know, my, my feelingabout it is, you know, somebody's
gonna come knock on my door.
Bring it man.
I mean I, yeah, I've got ashotgun here, it's loaded and ready
to roll.
If one of these morons, andyou know they're like £400 and yeah,

(34:05):
their truck would be so louddriving into the place they could
never sneak in.
But yeah.
So anyway, have you, have youreached out to the police or anything
on those?
No threats or.
It's nothing credible.
It didn't feel credibleenough, so I didn't.
And it's all coming fromAmericans you think, and bots?
No, I think some of them, afew of them also are in Finnish so

(34:26):
I don't know if they've used atranslator or if they're actually
Finns, but I think some ofthem might be bots because Russia
is using quite a lot of botsthat have become quite proficient
at speaking Finnish.
So I think some of them mightbe bots, but some of them might be
real people as well.
I think there's a sort of a trend.
Finland doesn't have any proRussians or almost none, but we have

(34:46):
quite a lot of these far rightguys who are very anti woke and they,
they see Elon as a sort ofhero because he's saying out loud
the things that they want tosay and he's openly being racist.
So they, they like him.
So, so there are some of thesepeople and of course those who are
unhappy with what I said arethe ones who are the loudest.
The average people in Finlandtry side with me but the average

(35:07):
is not gonna say anything.
So, so it's, yeah, it's thosewho got pissed at me who are the
loudest, but that's how it isand it's already better.
The first two days were a bit Rough.
But now it's already the thirdday and it's calming down a bit already.
Yeah.
As you said, they can come.
They can come and try if they.
If they want.
Yeah.
And what's your family.
How was your family's reactionto Musk Fu.
Retard.

(35:28):
I mean, they.
They're a bit shocked.
Shocked at how big this becamebecause in Finland it happened so
that the news were on Monday,but Monday was a public holiday in
Finland and there wasn't muchgoing on in the news, so it was on
all the main news news outlets.
It was the first thing, themain thing that you could see.
So my face was everywhere.
And it's kind of weird becauseI'm not very famous or anything,

(35:49):
so it was a.
Was a bit of a shock for themand so on.
But.
But they're not.
Yeah, other than that, they're not.
So I don't know.
They.
They know.
They knew how Elon Musk is,but they're just surprised that he's
so pathetic and so aggressive.
But.
But they.
I think they knew already.
He's that type of.
So.
So what's next for you in thisMusk dust up?
You're gonna let it die down or.

(36:10):
Yeah, I.
I mean, why don't you.
Invite him to Finland, havehim come in, take him to a special
ed classroom and explain tohim how good a school system he has
for special ed kids.
Yeah, I mean, that would be good.
If he wants to come visitFinland, he's.
He's more than welcome.
But, yeah, I think I'm justgonna let it die down because at
the end of the day, I'm.
The reason I'm still on X isnot for personal reasons.

(36:32):
I don't really enjoy beingthere, but X has been quite good
for me in terms of fundraisingfor Ukraine.
And because of that, I reallydon't want to be shadow banned or
lose my account because that happens.
Then I can fundraise way lessmoney for Ukraine.
So for me, I try to take thepositive side of this and the extra
followers and reach and use it to.

(36:53):
To get more trucks and moredrones to the Ukrainian army.
Of course, inside me, I wantedto answer something, but I just didn't
answer.
Because of that.
Yeah, no, I think.
And that's a nice segue to ournext topic, which is your.
Your work assisting with Ukraine.
So tell us more about that andmake sure we get a website plugged
in here so folks that areinterested can help you.
Yep, thanks.

(37:13):
Yeah, it's.
So basically, when the war.
When the Full scale war started.
There's this Estonianentrepreneur called Ragnar Sas who
founded a company calledPipedrive and he has some links to
Ukraine.
He knows a lot of Ukrainiansand he started this charity called
Help 99.
And on X it's known as the69th Brigade because it has this

(37:34):
NAFO thing.
But the.
But the website is called Help99 and it's an Estonian charity that
brings trucks and drones toUkrainian units.
And it's what's nice aboutthis charity is that very efficient
and it's only voluntary peoplemostly working.
So we get the money, we raisethe money, then we bring the trucks
ourselves and give themdirectly to the units.
There's no middleman, no extra cost.

(37:54):
So it's very efficient.
And my brother happens to knowthis guy.
And Ragnar asked my brother ifmy brother wanted to join.
And my brother joined in 2022.
So quite at the beginning ofthe full scale war.
And my brother went a fewtimes in 2022.
And then he told me that Ishould come as well.
And I've been doing this since 2023.
And what we do is once a monththere's a group of people who leave

(38:16):
from Tallinn and go to Kyivand they bring trucks and drones
and all sorts of stuff withthem and they're given directly to
the units.
So one truck for one unit.
And we try to give theequipment to the units that need
them the most.
And so I've been doing thatand I don't go every month, there's
always some people going, butI go every few months and we launch

(38:37):
fundraisers.
And right now we actuallyfinished one.
And we went to Ukraine inDecember and brought a little over
20 trucks to different units.
And I think the organizationitself has brought you over 500 trucks
right now, if I remember well.
And that's incredible.
That's incredible.
So.
So what's the website again,yoni help 99co.
Yeah, yeah, I've heard of that.

(38:58):
And I think actually one ofour upcoming guests, former Congressman
Denver Riggleman, was part ofone of those brigades driving a truck
in.
So we'll have to talk to himabout that when we have him on.
So, hey, Yanni, if you would.
You know, here in the state,it's been bizarre, you know, for.
Yeah, my entire lifetime,Russia was viewed as our adversary.

(39:19):
Yeah.
But it's become, you know,Putin's our pal and, you know, NATO
is our.
Our enemy.
Yeah.
Could you kind of explain tofolks here why Ukraine, why it matters?
Yeah, yeah.
I think the main reason forfor this change in the US Is obviously
conspiracy theories, DonaldTrump, and so on.
But it's.
Yeah, Ukraine is the.

(39:42):
Is kind of like the last wallbefore the West.
And Ukraine wants to be a partof the West.
The west has always beenworking in a way that if someone
wants, any country can decidewho they want to be allied with.
Countries are sovereign, theycan decide their direction that they
take.
And if the west allows Ukraineto be taken by Russia, it means that
we support this Russianrhetoric and thinking of spheres

(40:04):
of influence.
So it means that we, if weaccept Ukraine being taken by Russia,
at the same time, it meansthat we accept that Russia gets to
decide for its neighbors.
And at the same time, itweakens the US and it also makes
the US a less trustworthypartner because the US has signed
the Budapest memorandum andpromised to protect Ukraine's sovereignty.
This was signed by the UK andthe US And Russia back in the days

(40:27):
when Ukraine gave its nuclearweapons away.
So if the US doesn't supportUkraine, what happens is that Russia
gains, China gains.
At the same time, the US Isseen as weak and unreliable to its
allies, and that makes the US Weaker.
But it's also just on a moralstandpoint, it's totally wrong to
let Russia take Ukrainebecause Russia has just made up excuses.

(40:48):
But there's no legit reasonfor Russia to take Ukraine.
There's never been anygenocide in Donbass.
There's never been.
It's all built on lies.
So if the US Allows that tohappen, then it means that the US
Is not standing for freedomand for people's freedom to choose
who they want to be and whothey want to be allied with.
So it's basically the end ofwhat the US has been standing for

(41:09):
decades.
So, yeah, it's very hard forus in Europe to look at Republicans
and remember how Reagan was.
Even if Reagan had his flawson maybe on economic policy or things
like that, but overall, Reaganwas not standing for these dictatorships
and so on.
It's crazy to see that theRepublican Party has turned into
this fan club of authoritarian regimes.

(41:29):
Just makes no sense.
It's amazing now that, youknow, Trump is saying he wants to
take and make Canada our nextstate and take the Panama Canal and
take Greenland.
And so, you know, Denmark, youknow, is a NATO ally.
Exactly.
And now you've got the USThreatening to use military force
against a NATO ally to taketheir property.

(41:52):
And it's a NATO ally that hasbeen helping the US In Iraq, in Afghanistan.
Denmark had the highest percapita losses in Afghanistan of All
NATO members higher than the U.S.
so it's a true ally, a loyalally that has been following the
US Everywhere and that hasallowed the US to have a base in
Greenland.
And yet that's how Trumprewards them for their loyalty.

(42:13):
Well, I would imagine for, youknow, you're literally Russia is
your next door neighbor.
Yeah, I would imagine folks inFinland are looking at Ukraine, I
think, think differently than,you know, we've got an ocean between
us and Russia.
But yeah, what's the moodthere in, in Finland for us?
I mean, we, Finland has a veryspecific history because we were

(42:34):
forced into neutrality afterWorld War II.
So for a couple decades,basically for the whole Cold War,
we were forced to be neutral,even if in reality we would have
sided with the west if we hada choice.
But Finns, even if they don'talways say it out loud, out loud.
Finns have always dislikedRussia and always feared Russia.
Because of that, we've beenpreparing since the end of the World

(42:54):
War II, we've been preparing.
Our infrastructure is made sothat if a war starts, civilians are
protected and so on.
We have bomb shelters for allcivilians in the country.
And Helsinki is kind of likehas two cities.
It has an underground city andthe city that you see if you go there,
but the underground cities,bomb shelters mostly.
And because of that, we, ofcourse, we are worried when we watch
what's happening with Ukraine,but we're also not surprised because

(43:17):
we've been preparing for thisand we've been knowing that Russia
acts like this.
And we've been very happy tosee that Ukraine fought so hard because
most Finns probably believedbefore the full scale invasion that
if one would happen thatUkraine would fold and lose in a
couple of weeks or months.
And actually that's not happening.
So Ukraine has been fightingheroically and that's great to see.

(43:39):
And that has weakened Russiaon a military and economic level,
but has also made Russia more unhinged.
So it's a tough situationright now.
We have no Russian troopsalmost at our border because they're
all in Ukraine.
So we don't feel directlythreatened by any full scale invasion,
but we feel threatened byhybrid operations.
And Russia has a lot of themhere in Finland.
And we're also worried for theBaltics because they're smaller countries

(44:01):
with smaller army, lower populations.
So of course, Trump is a worryfor us because we know that if Trump
decides to spend US Membershipin NATO or to leave NATO, that would
empower Russia and China tomake moves.
Russia probably knows thatit's Very unlikely that Macron or
Scholz are going to start aworld war for some small city on

(44:22):
the border of Russia,somewhere in Estonia or Latvia.
So we are worried, but we prepare.
And in Finland, we're maybemore worried.
For other neighboring states,we've been preparing, but there are
some other countries that havebeen depending on NATO a lot, and
for them it might be verytough if Trump makes moves, leaves
NATO at some point.
Yeah, I know it's not muchconsolation, but a lot of us are
worried about Trump, too.

(44:43):
So it's not just you guys.
No, no.
He can have a bad impact, ofcourse, internally in the US as well.
And.
And, yeah, it's just verytough to know what's going to happen
because he keeps changing his mind.
And from our perspective, heseemed like the only quite positive
thing about him in the firstterm was that he seemed somewhat
anti China.
And now I think that there'sbeen a change on that as well.

(45:06):
So he doesn't seem that antiChina anymore.
So it's quite a.
We don't see much positive inhim being the president here right
now.
But do you think the.
His move is softening on Chinais a result of Elon?
I think it's a result of Elon,but not only Elon, the whole South
African mafia.
So all the paypal mafia guyshave quite a lot.

(45:29):
I mean, I mean, I'm sureElon's thinking also comes from David
Sachs and Peter Thiel a lot.
And those guys all haveinfluence and they basically own
J.D.
vance, and they helped him getelected and he probably owes them.
So that's probably one reason.
But I think the other reasonis just simply that there was quite
some continuation betweenTrump and Biden on China.

(45:50):
So even if Biden and Democratsare not fans of Trump, they realize
during the last term thatChina is starting to really be a,
an issue.
And they became more antiChina than they had been before.
And since Democrats becamesomewhat anti China, then it didn't
make sense for Trump to beanti China anymore, so he changed
his mind.
But I think also finally, thelast reason, I think, is just that

(46:11):
China helped him get electedwith TikTok, because TikTok has a
huge influence on voters, aswe saw in Romania with those elections,
but Also in the US a lot ofAmericans use TikTok and TikTok acting
in a way that we don't reallyknow what he puts forward.
And that's the reason it'sgoing to be banned.
But I think, I mean, maybe nowit won't be banned.
But I think Trump realizedthat TikTok really helped him get
elected and is a good way tospread this information and to influence

(46:34):
voters.
So I think that's also onereason why he, he has changed his
mind on, on China.
But it's, yeah, it's veryscary to watch that.
And have you, have theRussians or the Chinese been probing
Finland to test?
Yeah, yeah, they.
So there's been quite a lotof, of things going on.
We have this pipeline betweenFinland and Estonia that was destroyed

(46:55):
by a Chinese boat with aRussian crew a year ago.
So there was one pipeline thatwas destroyed and then we've had
some Internet cables that havebeen destroyed.
And now we also had a cablethat sent electricity from Finland.
Estonia that was destroyedrecently by a shadow fleet boat by
Russia.
So they've been acting a lotin the Baltic Sea, probing us there,

(47:15):
but they've also done mademoves in Finland, Dave.
There's been some break ins inour critical infrastructure, in our
water supply and stuff like that.
And a lot of drones have beenflying over our critical infrastructure.
And there's been more and morecyber attacks.
So they are testing us.
And it's a tough one becauseFinland is quite prepared for this
and we've been expecting thisto happen.
But their goal is also toscare the population.

(47:38):
So if you make a huge deal outof it, they win.
But at the same time, if youignore it, they also win.
So you have to find the rightbalance and act on it without scaring
the population.
So that's a tough one.
But I think so far Finland hasdone quite well on it.
Yeah.
And from my, my perspective,you know, I've done a little bit
of research on and been toFinland several times.

(47:59):
Yep.
But, but Finland really has arobust defense of its borders as
well as has, as you mentioned,has been preparing for potential
incursion by Russia forliterally 50, 60 years.
Yeah, yeah.
And the populace is trainedand armed and the defenses.

(48:21):
And I assume they haven'tmoved a lot of their defense equipment
into Ukraine.
No, I mean, we give quite alot of equipment, but we don't say
how much we give.
So the way Finland works is ifthe U.S.
gives, I don't know, tank tothe U.S.
they will give the value ofthat tank and count it as eight.
But when Finland givesequipment, the way we work is if

(48:42):
we give new, new equipment, wecount the value, but if we give old
equipment, we don't count the value.
So that Russia doesn't knowwhat equipment we've been giving
or how much.
Right.
I think most of the equipmentwe've been given has been old equipment,
but we have, we kept quite oldschool military because we, we are
a small nation of 5.6 millionpeople and we know that you need

(49:04):
a lot of artillery to stop Russia.
So our army, our air force ismodern and we have tons, tons of
artillery and a lot of men andwe're well organized, but we have
quite a small navy.
And obviously we don't havethat much high level air defense.
We don't have that much.
We don't have ballisticmissiles and things like that.
So our army is really made forterritorial defense against Russia

(49:26):
and we have a reserve of870,000 men and our wartime troops
are 280,000.
And the way it works is if awar starts, we use those 280,000
and then when someone dies, wereplace them with someone from the
reserve.
Then we have people serve forone year and then they have these
trainings every year or twoafter that to keep up the skills.
And it's still very popular here.

(49:48):
People don't want to stop it.
And I think it's going tocontinue for a while, even if we
are members of NATO, becausewe know that we can't depend on anyone.
Yeah.
And that's part of the newTrump doctrine.
Is whatever loyalty we had toyou in the past you can forget about.
Yeah, unfortunately, hopefullyit doesn't come to that.
Yanni, obviously we're notwishing this to happen, but I don't

(50:09):
think Americans and other,especially Americans don't really
understand the, that thethreat that Finland and some of these
other border and Balticcountries have felt from Russia,
even post, post glasnost.
And so I think the fact thatyou guys are prepared is probably
one reason that they're notgoing to mess around with you too

(50:30):
much.
No, no.
Yeah.
The biggest fear is more forLatvia and Lithuania and Estonia.
They are, they're prepared forthe size of the country, but they're
just so small and they have abit less GDP as well.
So their armies are just much smaller.
So, so those are the ones I'mmore worried about in Georgia, of
course.
Right.
Okay.
So we've talked Putin, we'vetalked, talked Musk, we've talked

(50:51):
Trump.
You know, as an outsider, youknow what, what is your take on the
Trump upcoming Trump reign, Iguess we call it.
What are your thought?
Where do you think it's headed?
I mean, I'm just interested inyour outside perspective.
Just because you seem to bevery attuned to American politics
and news and, and I think ithelps Americans to understand what

(51:13):
others are seeing.
Maybe we're not seeing some of it's.
Really hard to say, but Ithink it's obviously the fact that
it's his last term, at leastofficially, and that he has the practice
from the first term.
So he knows in the first termhe still had some decent people around
him who are not necessarilythat loyal to him, but who are acting
in the best interest of the country.

(51:33):
And because of that, the firstterm was not as much of a disaster
as it could have been.
But he has learned from hismistakes and from people not being
loyal to him, and he's onlyput loyalists around him this time.
So I have very low expectations.
I think they're going to havereally high quality propaganda and
they're going to, thanks toTikTok and X, they're going to be
able.

(51:53):
And Fox News and so on.
They're going to be able tosell anything as good policy and
as good results.
But I have very low confidencein this administration making any
good moves on foreign policy,but also on any other policy.
I think U.S.
public debt is going toincrease faster than before.
I think the prices are goingto increase more than under Biden

(52:15):
because of the tariffs and.
And the US Is going toaccelerate the end of its hegemony
by making its because the U.S.
needs its allies.
The U.S.
is strong, of course, but the U.S.
without its allies cannotconfront China and Russia at the
same time.
So.
So if the US doesn't help itsallies and threatens them with invasions,
they're also not going to backthe U.S.
when the U.S.

(52:36):
needs them, needs help whenconfronting China.
So if the US Turns its back toits allies, it's also becoming weaker
and less reliable, and that'sgoing to mean less exports of weapons,
less exports of everything.
Overall, I think the US Isgoing to become a weaker and more
divided country.
And that's very sad because Ithink there was a great opportunity

(52:58):
for the US to actually dealwith Russia and China and stay the
hegemon for, for at least afew decades longer.
But I think thisadministration has a chance to ruin
this and to accelerate that decline.
So that's very sad.
And I hope that I'm wrong.
And even if I dislike thosepeople, if they make good moves,
I'll be more than happy.

(53:19):
I don't want them to failbecause it's bad for humanity as
a whole and it creates a lotof power vacuums and a lot of conflicts
around the world if the USWithdraws and transits back.
So.
So I hope that they succeed,but I don't really see it happening.
And I think that they're goingto have a hard time with all their
promises and it's just goingto be a shit show.

(53:40):
But I hope that I'm wrong.
Over to you, Will.
Yeah.
Yanni, do you have anythoughts on.
You mentioned aboutdisinformation and the proliferation
of it and it's going to getworse, not better for the next four
years.
So for folks that are still,that still believe in fact, it's.
To me it's going to be more ofan asymmetrical fight.

(54:02):
You know, the, the other sideis kind of beaten the media into
submission.
You saw where Mark Zuckerbergnow Facebook is taking down their
fact checking.
Any, any thoughts on.
On how we confront this eradisinformation and how we get the
truth out of people?
There's this internal debatein my head that I've been having

(54:23):
for a few weeks about botsand, and trolls online because the
site we're opposing, theycontrol the platforms, they have
their own medias, but theyalso have bots and they use those
and that helps them amplifytheir disinformation.
And obviously in terms ofbeing honest, it's good that our
side has not used bots becauseusing bots is a very dishonest way

(54:47):
to amplify information andpush this information.
But I'm really struggling tosee how we could fight them on disinformation
and counter theirdisinformation without the use of
bots.
So I'm really, I don't knowbecause again, morally it's a very
tough one.
But I think maybe we mightneed to have to.
We might have to do the samething that they're doing, which is

(55:07):
to counter fire with fire andto start using bots to cancel what
they're doing.
Because every time you postsomething that's true, they will
just get more reach becausethanks to their bots and thanks to
their disinformation, theyjust managed to beat us at that game.
So I think the only way that Isee right now is get back at them

(55:28):
with their own strategy.
But that's a tough one becauseagain, once you do it, it's something.
There's no way back and youlose some credibility.
So it's a tough one.
At least in the us In Europewe still have the possibility to
regulate and to try to takecontrol over the algorithm.
We could, in the, on an EUlevel we could say that if we want
to see the algorithm and wewant to see what content is put forward

(55:48):
and if you don't do that, wecan ban your platform.
If we manage to do that,that's a good way to doing it.
It to do it.
But I think on a private levelin the US bots might be the, the
best way to counter bots.
And that's, yeah, that's a sadreality, but that's, that's what
I've been debating in my headfor the last few weeks.
That's so interesting, Yoni,because I, I actually advocated for
that in this last, last election.

(56:09):
We've, you know, Democrats andindependent minded folks have unilaterally
disarmed themselves.
Yeah.
And the bots don't necessarilyhave to spread disinformation.
They could, they could spread fact.
So I've been advocating tocreate my own bot farm or our own
bot AI program that couldcounter a bunch of this crap.
Yeah, it's really interestingthat you've kind of come up with

(56:32):
that idea on your own as well.
Yeah, yeah.
And as you said, I think theyspread this information, but we could
just counter theirdisinformation with facts.
So it wouldn't be, in thatsense, it would be more acceptable
on a moral level as wellbecause they wouldn't be real humans,
but at least they would spread facts.
So yeah, I think that's, it'sinteresting also on my side because
I haven't talked about thiswith other people, but it's great

(56:54):
to see that some other peoplethink the same way.
So I think that might be theway forward, but it requires some
organizing and some funds andwe have to see how it goes because
the other side is not doing itopenly and it's hard to do it in
an open way.
So we have to.
But maybe I need to, maybe weneed to start advocating for.
That's.
Yeah, yeah, I think what's formed.

(57:14):
The Finnish American alliancefor AI Bots.
Exactly.
And I've done crazier thingsthan that, so.
Yeah.
All right, so we've asked alot of questions.
What questions do you have forus, Yoni?
Anything for Mo and myselfthat we could help answer.
What's your take on thesenominations that Trump people, that

(57:37):
Trump is going to try tonominate Tulsi and, and Hexath and,
and so on.
Do you think that it's gonnago through or do you think that it's,
that they're gonna manage toget some FBI background check on
them or how do you think thatit's going to work out?
It's going to be interesting.
I, I'm certainly happy I'm notJohn Thune, you know, the new, new,
new leader of the Senate, because.

(57:58):
Yeah, yeah.
I'm hopeful that, you know,he's got a spine and it's gonna stand
up and do the right thing.
I'm disappointed.
I, I spent 25 years in themilitary and one of my, my colleagues
that I, I worked with, thatI've known since, well, shoot, for
40 years now is Lindsey Graham.
And it really bothers mebecause I know that Lindsey Graham

(58:20):
knows better.
Yeah.
And to behave the way he's behaving.
But he's made the calculationthat it's in his interest to, you
know, to sidle up to Trump anddo his bidding.
So we'll have to see what JohnThune does, I think.
I'm, I'm wondering if some ofthis saber ratt Panama and Greenland
and Canada and that stuff isto deflect because there's so much

(58:41):
attention getting focused on that.
There hadn't been a lot oftalk in the last week or two about
the horrible nominees thathe's put forward.
Yeah, yeah.
So I think in some respects,this may be, you know, another disinformation
campaign to, you know, takethe focus off because I can tell
you I served in the militaryfor 25 years and Pete Hedge Seth

(59:03):
and I used to trade insults onTwitter until I think we both blocked
each other.
Yeah.
He's a horrible, horrible choice.
Yeah.
Secretary of Defense.
Yeah.
And it really concerns me if, if.
Well, you know, number one, itconcerns me having Donald Trump as
Commander in chief.
I mean, yeah.
Here's a man that cannot meetthe minimum standards of conduct

(59:24):
that we demand of an 18 yearold who's reporting today for basic
training.
Yeah.
He's going to be the commanderin chief.
And Hedge Seth is, again,doesn't have the qualifications or
the, the integrity.
No.
To do the job.
So, yeah, I hope I don't.
I hope I'm not putting toomuch faith in John Thune.

(59:45):
But, yeah, I'm, I'm hopefulthat there are at least a couple
of Republicans that will dothe right thing and what's in the
best interest of the, of thecountry and the world and not just
bow down to Trump.
Yeah.
That.
I, I hope that that happens.
And for some reason, I'm evenmore worried about Tulsi in the sense
that she, I mean, het.

(01:00:06):
Sethi is a bad person anddoesn't have the qualifications,
but I don't see him as proRussian or pro China.
I think that he's just a Trump loyalist.
And a bad person overall withno qualifications.
But Salsi is actually proRussia and pro China.
And yeah, it's very scary.
But I hope that you're rightand I hope that a couple Republicans

(01:00:27):
will have enough of us do that.
So you did most of your careerin the military, attorney?
Yeah, I was in the Air Force.
I'm an attorney, so I was inour, our JAG corps.
That My, my, the first trial Iever did in the military was in 1984.
And my opponent was a youngcaptain from South Carolina named
Lindsey Graham.
Okay.
So that's, I've known him for,for 40 years now.

(01:00:47):
And, you know, when I was thechief prosecutor for the terrorism
trials at Guantanamo Bay and Iended up resigning over the issue
of torture.
And the two people that stoodup against the Bush administration
and fought against Guantanamoand torture and the whole, you know,
post 9 11, you know, thingsthat we did that we shouldn't have

(01:01:08):
done were John McCain andLindsey Graham.
Yeah.
And so for me, it's reallydisappointing that, as I said, I,
I have no doubt he knows better.
Yeah.
But, you know, like so manyothers, he's made the calculation
that it's in his interest to,to, you know, go with it.
And he's up for re election intwo years, I think, too.

(01:01:28):
Yeah, that's where I'm hopingon the Senate side, you know, some
of the folks that wererecently reelected and don't face
the voters again for anothersix years, you know, that'll get
them past the Trumpadministration that maybe they can
have the gumption to stand upand do the right things.
I think the ones that arecoming up for election in 2026, you

(01:01:49):
know, are certainly looking atit and making that calculation.
Is what's going to happen ifI, if I stand up to Trump.
Yeah.
They don't want to have Muskfinance their opponents.
Right.
Yeah, we'll see how long thatMusk Trump thing lasts, too.
I mean, I, I'm, I'm a followerof, of human psychology and, and
been around VIPs andgovernment officials most of my life

(01:02:12):
and most rooms aren't bigenough for those two big heads to
be in, so we'll see what happens.
But so, Yanni, thank you somuch for joining us in our thank
you first podcast here.
It's been a pleasure to talkto you and same if you could remind,
if you could remind folksagain about your Ukrainian work in
the website where folks couldgo to as well as if they want more

(01:02:35):
information on you, where theycould contact you or see more about
what you're doing.
So.
So the organization, thewebsite is called help99co, and on
Twitter or X, you can find it.
The name is the 69th Brigade.
And then to contact me, I'm onX with my name, Yoni Ascola, and

(01:02:56):
I also have a YouTube channelwith the name Yoni Ascola.
And you can send a comment ormessage and I will try my best to
answer.
And, yeah, thanks for having me.
It's been a pleasure.
And if you end up up doing alot more episodes, I'd be more than
happy to come again.
Yeah, why don't we do this, Yoni?
Why don't we have an openinvitation for you whenever you want

(01:03:16):
to come on and give us anupdate about things in Finland?
I think you, you guys are onthe front line of what may or may
not happen next.
And I think it's importantthat people here in these.
In the States and elsewhereunderstand that it's not just Ukraine
that we're concerned about.
It's.
It's other parts of the worldand Finland certainly on the front
line.
So with that, that, our thanksto you, Yanni Escola, for joining

(01:03:39):
us this morning.
And thank you giving us anupdate on things in Finland as well
as his interestingconversation with Elon Musk.
Yeah, keep up the good work.
Thank you.
And YouTube.
Thank you.
This has been Muck you, hostedby Colonel Mo Davis and David B.
Wheeler.
Muck you is produced byAmerican Muckrakers.
Please support Yoni'svolunteer work for [e-mail]

(01:04:03):
and follow Yoni on X at Y N IA S K O L A More on American muckrakers@american
muckrakers.com this podcast iscopyright 2025 and all rights reserved
by American Muckrakers.