Wall Street Journal Reported Musk's Affair with Brin's Wife but it Backfired

Hello, everyone, welcome to Wayne and Kathy's show. I'm your host, Wei Fang, and today is Waze time. And today, what took the headline of the most media are the Wall Street Journal's reporting the breaking news on Elon Musk's sexual scandal with Nicole Shannon, who is the wife of Sergey Brin, the co-founder of Google. So there's really a lot of things to talk about over there, which I want to share with you my observation behind the scene about what is behind the scene. And before that, let's quickly talk about Nancy Pelosi's visit of Taiwan. As you know, the Financial News broke the news that Nancy Pelosi will be visiting, will be leading a delegation of the Congress to visit Asia, and one of the stops is Taiwan. And since then, the most recent news is CCP, Chinese government, has issued at least three rounds of very stern warning. So their word is very strong and very sharp, the strength of the warning is unprecedented. They even said that they will not exclude a military measure to counter this visit. In the meantime, President Biden said, well, military think that Pelosi's visit in Taiwan is not a good idea at this time. So I reported to you last week that President Biden is showing some kind of backing off that type of thought. And of course, which would send a very clear and a bad message to the CCP. So today, Newt Gingrich, who was the first Speaker of the House who led the congressional delegation to Taiwan in the 1990s, he tweeted. He's saying that the Communist China cannot dictate a Speaker's trip. And Mike Pompeo, the former Secretary of State, said, I will go there with you, OK? I wasn't allowed to enter China, but Taiwan did not forbid my entry, the freedom-loving Taiwan. See you there, OK? And then two House representatives, one is Tom Tiffany, Republican, another is Scott Perry, and they wrote a joint letter to Pelosi, calling her to ignore the objection of Beijing and Biden. And they said, to have a dialogue with our U.S. ally, we would never need to get approval of a foreign totalitarian regime and our State Department. They went one step further and called for Pelosi to arrange for the House to vote on their resolution. They have a resolution that they raised last February, to terminate the one China policy, foreign policy. OK. So, the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post has a columnist, Rogen, wrote that the American military are considering sending aircraft carrier fleet, or the military plane, to escort Pelosi's visit of Taiwan. So actually, would that be needed? But actually, now it's a psychological warfare, right? You can call it like a game of chicken, OK? Two sides just heading to each other, and we'll see who at the last moment would swerve. But actually, as a matter of fact, it's not really a game of chicken, OK? Let me share with you my reading of the words on the mind of the Biden administration. They dare not to have Pelosi go there, OK, because they're afraid of creating big trouble. But they dare not back off either, because that's going to lose face. That's going to show U.S. is very timid. If they dare not even to visit Taiwan, how can they, you know, how can they dare to send military if Taiwan, when Taiwan was attacked, is attacked? So that's Biden administration's dilemma. But for CCP, it's much simpler, OK? They don't have dilemma. They just raise their voice, and they just keep repeating their rhetoric, and in the hope of just scaring the U.S. off. That's the only thing. If the U.S. is not scared off, they're going to say, oops, OK, forget about it. That's where they are. So it's a very simple matter, OK, the essence of the matter. But as one of them, one of you wrote in my last show, saying that our government now is scared even at, you know, just even at seeing a mouse, pretty precise, OK? So as a matter of fact, the situation in Taiwan, U.S. has absolute control. CCP, yes, they become more modernized, they have a much stronger military. But in their mind, they know they are no match, they are no match to American military. So we just need to show our resolve, show our strength. We can, Pelosi can go to Taiwan, and we can keep the peace. This is called peace through strength. All right, that's the first thing. Now let's quickly talk about the big news today, OK? Wall Street Journal published a piece of news saying that Elon Musk engaged in a brief affair last fall with the wife of Sergey Brin. And then, OK, the report has a lot of details, saying that, you know, the Brin filed for divorce from his wife, Nicole Shanahan, earlier this year. And then Brin also ended the, you know, his longtime friendship with Elon Musk. The report also said Mr. Brin provided Elon Musk with about $500,000 for Tesla during his most difficult time, which is the 2008 financial crisis. Then the report said in early December 2021, at the Art Basel event in Miami, which is a multi-day annual festival that draws wealthy attendees from around the world, Elon Musk had an affair with Nicole Shanahan. At that time, you know, Nicole was still married to Sergey Brin. So then the report also said Mr. Brin has ordered his financial advisors to sell his personal investment in Mr. Musk's companies. And then the report also said Elon Musk dropped one knee in front of Mr. Brin earlier this year and apologized profusely for the transgression, begging for forgiveness. And Mr. Brin acknowledged the apology, but still is not speaking regularly to Mr. Musk. Those people said. So what can we take, you know, I read the news in the morning, OK, before I got any further information and before Elon Musk, you know, Elon Musk came out and expressed his point of view. And I already tweeted in Chinese saying that this is highly suspicious. Why? I'm a journalist. Wall Street Journal has a breaking piece. Whenever you have a breaking piece, any professional journalist, journalist, journalist professional would search for the source of news. You know, we just, first thing we go for the source of news, want to know how credible that source of news is. And that would decide how credible the story is. However, yeah, if you look through the, I'm sorry, if you look through the entire article, you find no source of news. Nobody. OK. All the sources are somebody, those people, I identify the people, people close to him, that kind of thing. Just think about it. We go to court, right? Like, you know, I'm a prosecutor and you are a judge. I'm going to tell you, Your Honor, I don't have any witness with me. But one witness said this. Another witness said this. The third witness said this. But who are they? I cannot tell you. Sorry. Just trust me. Would you rule in my favor? Would you think I'm credible? If you, you know, the judge cannot do that, how can the reader believe in the report by this Wall Street Journal? Yeah, what further is, there's a suspicious, you know, other suspicious point in the report. Let me give you a few examples. The report said Elon Musk has been accused of exposing himself to a flight attendees at his aerospace company, SpaceX, which he has denied. Well, it looks like just a statement. But the matter of fact is, this accusation was never proven, OK? It was not even nearly proven. And this reporter dared to allude to that. So that's indicated that his tendency. The second is that it says that, it wrote this, the publication Business Insider reported that Elon Musk has two children late last year with a female executive at another company he co-founded, Neuralink. So the writing hinted that while he had a relationship with his then wife or with another lady, Grimes, as you remember, that he also had this relationship with this female executive. But as a matter of fact, if you know what happened, what really happened to Elon Musk, he has been breaking off with Grimes in the last couple of years. So this does not mean anything. But by not going into the detail, just putting it there, it just does cast the impression of Elon Musk has a messy private life. And another one, a place that the report said, Elon Musk juggles business challenges, including manufacturing disruption at Tesla Inc. That's a clear indication of the bias of the reporter, actually two reporters. Why? Because last Thursday, Elon Musk just issued his quarterly report. It's a brilliant, it's a brilliant quarterly report. The stock jumped by $70 in one day, which is 10%. Elon Musk gained $12 billion in that one day, I mean, paper-wise, paper value. So basically, this so-called manufacturing disruption means nothing to him. But this report came out yesterday, and the quarterly report came out four days ago, and they still chose to put this in. So that's a dishonest practice and disregard of the factual news. But the thing is, after this came out, New York Times, CNN, NBC, even New York Post, they all carried this story. Just like this is the most, how to say, credible story in the world. But think about that. Think about this, folks. New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, New York Post, how about their journalists? Don't they know what I know? Search for the source of news and find none? Of course they know that. But they still carry it without hesitation. Why? I'll talk about it a bit later. Let's look at Elon Musk's response. Basically, he said throughout the day, he's been tweeting, he said this is total BS. Nobody has been interviewed by this true reporter in this report. He took note of that, too. He also said, in the past three years, I only met Nicole for two times, and nothing romantic with other people around. And he also said, you know, I was with Sergey Brin last night, and one picture is worth 1,000 tweets. So Tony, if you can show that picture. And this is just, he said, this is just last night. Does that look like they are ending their friendship? They're having a fight over the women? Doesn't look so at all. Elon Musk also said, I work crazy hours. I don't have time for this shenanigans. And he also said, he said something very private. He said, I haven't had sex in ages. And somebody, he also mentioned in his tweet, saying that how credible Wall Street Journal is. He said, once Wall Street Journal reported that FBI is coming to arrest Elon Musk, so he got concerned. He called FBI. FBI said, there's no such thing. And so he asked them, why did Wall Street report about that? He said, they're all fake. So he said, that's what Wall Street Journal is. So Elon Musk, in his tweet, he said, Wall Street Journal, they should respect the fact, no reporting on this hearsay, they're just turning themselves into sub tabloid. And people was asking, actually, on Twitter, saying that, why do you think you received so much attack these days? Well, he said, because it's native for them to do this, they are the clip baits. But publishing such a sensational thing, they can get a lot of traffic. Well, is he right? Yes. Is he very right? No. What I mean is, I really don't see that's the real reason. That's only the surface reason. I don't think Elon Musk is vigilant enough. By offering to buy Twitter, which is the most crucial platform, where the opinion leader of this country concentrate on, Elon is posting an existing threat to many people, many establishment. So buying Twitter is a big deal to them. It's a lifeline to the, how to say, in their eyes, the propaganda, to the propaganda. And Twitter is a key platform. And nobody can fight Elon Musk because he offered $440 billion. That's too much to fight for and to fight with. So what they do, they line up, join hands, and try to kill his name in this one shot. That's why this nonsense report, this report without any even source of news, and Wall Street Journal dare to publish it, and so many mainstream media carry it, and creating a very strong general impression of Elon Musk is a messy, he's a messed up person, he's not trustworthy, and so on and so forth. And you got media from CNN on the left, MSNBC, you also got media from the New York Post. And you wonder why. Why would they join hands? But if I ask you, did they join hands before, in the November 3rd, two years ago, remember that? They joined hands there. That's why, at that night, remember what Fox News did? So that's why I say Fox News is very foxy. It's a foxy news. They can do what they do in the normal time, earn the conservatives' eyeballs. But in their mind, when the killing comes, they do the kill. So this is a similar situation. But in this particular case, Fox News did not join, I think. They reported Elon Musk's response mainly. My reading, I could be wrong, but since I'm here, I just want to share with you honestly, I think they don't think this is a big kill enough. It's not worth their move. They probably will reserve their big move to some next crucial time, which you understand what. So anyway, so Elon Musk is against a lot of things, and what I see is that media are not pure media. They are weapons. They are weaponized. But however, look at the result. Wall Street Journal's work last night, it was meant to be a headpiece on Elon Musk, but it's not, at least according to the people who follow him on Twitter and who listen to his show, it's a headpiece on the credibility of Wall Street Journal. They ruined their own names. They bankrupt their own credibility. That's the consequence, that's the cost of their putting out that article. So what do you think? Yeah, I just want you to know that, yeah, Mark, you say, I'm late too. Yeah, I'm sorry, I'm late too, but because I've got other things, we're going to switch to save chat, the second half of the show, please use the following there. And actually, I'm carrying on, I'm carrying on through the end of it. So yeah, I figured, you know, it didn't change. But if you go, if you went to save chat, it's also there. Okay. All right. I don't know. What do you think? Do you agree with me? Okay. I think I make some pretty bold, how to say, express some bold opinion. And I do see so. I do believe so. I'm a journalist. So I can relate to the situation from my point of view. But do you agree? Okay. All right. Thank you very much for staying with us. And again, I apologize, we're being late for almost like a 30 minutes, okay. You know, in the other days, we'll stay with the 10 o'clock, which is 7 o'clock. And Mark, you said wholeheartedly agree. Okay. I'm glad that you say so. Yeah, it's just, it's a very, how to say, yeah, it's a dangerous world for Elon Musk. And to him, he does not realize that. He feels it's just a clickbait. They just want to get some traffic and make some money because they rely on advertisement. I think it's beyond that. He has not sensed the danger that's coming to him. Okay. And because he's taking away their thing, Twitter, the propaganda thing, the propaganda tool. So, all right, let's wish the best to him and all the people who love and advocate freedom of speech. That's why we're able to, you know, have this conversation here. Freedom of speech, first amendment, guaranteed by our constitution and created by our founding fathers. All right. Thank you very much. Have a good night. And we should stay with us and all right. Take care. Bye-bye.