The Political Insider

Elon Musk continued pressing for peaceful negotiations to end the Ukraine-Russia conflict and avert global nuclear war, while RussiaGate figure and star witness in the first impeachment trial of Donald Trump, Fiona Hill, accused him of transmitting messages for Vladimir Putin. 

The Tesla CEO took to Twitter Monday to share a Newsweek op-ed that argued “neocons and the woke left” are leading us into “Woke War III.”

The column, written by David Sacks, pointed out that Musk had found himself in hot water for daring to propose a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine that included concessions on both sides – in an effort to avoid nuclear war and hundreds of millions, if not billions, of humans perishing as a result.

For his troubles, Musk was immediately branded a Putin sympathizer, as has become common in recent years.

RELATED: Experts Split on Threat of Russian Nuclear Escalation as Biden Vacillates

Transmitting Messages For Putin?

Fiona Hill, who featured heavily in RussiaGate and the first impeachment of Trump, accused Musk of “transmitting a message” on behalf of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In particular, she noted the mention of water supplies.

“It’s unlikely Elon Musk knows about this himself,” she said in an interview with Politico. “The reference to water is so specific that this clearly is a message from Putin.”

Or, you know, he simply googled Crimea and read various reports on the key role the water supply has in the Russia-Ukraine conflict dating back to 2021. It’s not as if the water crisis in the area was super-secret.

But of course, facts don’t matter when it comes to accusing people of being secret Russian agents.

Hill continued to expand on her theory that Putin was speaking through Musk.

“Putin does this frequently,” she said. “He uses prominent people as intermediaries to feel out the general political environment, to basically test how people are going to react to ideas.”

And she simply wouldn’t let up.

“It’s ironic that Elon Musk, the man who has been talking about getting us to Mars should be Putin’s messenger for the war in Ukraine, when we’re having a really hard time getting our act together on this planet,” she alleged.

Related: Tucker Carlson SHREDS Ukraine’s Zelensky For ‘Shaking Down’ Congress For More Money

Elon Musk Continues to Lobby Against Nuclear War

Elon Musk continued to warn of the threat of nuclear war Monday, once again referencing Russia’s insistence that Ukraine acknowledges Crimea as Russian territory.

“If Russia is faced with the choice of losing Crimea or using battlefield nukes, they will choose the latter,” he wrote in response to his prediction of a possible nuclear war. “We’ve already sanctioned/cutoff Russia in every possible way, so what more do they have left to lose?”

“If we nuke Russia back, they will nuke us and then we have WW3,” he cautioned.

Critics noted that Musk’s messages were focused mostly on Russia’s needs and Ukraine’s concessions.

“If Russia faces destruction of their army and utter defeat by NATO, they will use nukes, then NATO will respond with nukes and civilization is over,” the billionaire fired back.

“But, hey, look on the bright side! At least Russia doesn’t get Crimea in that scenario, so you can be comforted by that thought, while watching the mushroom clouds rise.”

And unlike Hill, Musk has actually put his money where his mouth is – with his company Starlink supplying and even paying for satellite internet that the Ukraine military depends on. Essentially, and whether deliberate or not, that makes Musk the enemy in the eyes of Russia.

Former President Donald Trump has also argued, like Elon Musk, that nuclear war must be averted.

“Be strategic, be smart (brilliant!), get a negotiated deal done NOW,” Trump said. “Both sides need and want it. The entire World is at stake.”

Musk and Trump’s calls for peace actually led Pavel Podvig, a so-called expert on Russia’s nuclear doctrine and capabilities at the UN Institute for Disarmament Research, to accuse the men of being “dangerous.”

Let me repeat – calling to avoid nuclear war, not actual nuclear war, is dangerous.

“If you yield to this nuclear threat once, then what would prevent Russia in the future — or others — to do the same thing again?” Podvig said.

“Just giving in at this point would actually be dangerous,” he added.