Gavin McInnes, the Proud Boys and Vice founder accused by detractors of being a right-wing, racist extremist, has resurfaced nearly two weeks after faking an on-air arrest by federal authorities in the middle of his live podcast to answer the pile of hate mail he’s received from fans since his stunt.
As we previously reported, McInnes appeared to be removed from his Bronx studio in the middle of his live Get Off My Lawn podcast on August 25, shortly after he began to address one or more seemingly uninvited, off-camera guests. McInnes then engaged in some cringe-inducing play acting about setting up a meeting between his lawyer and the unseen visitors. Within days, it was exposed as a hoax, with LAMag reporting exclusively that McInnes had been spotted trotting about the south of France.
On Tuesday, McInnes returned to his podcast where, first of all, he confirmed that France had indeed been among his family’s destinations since ditching the show to dupe his supporters… McInnes admitted that while casual devotees of his show were split on whatever it was he was trying to do, his true cultural offspring really hated it.
“So, as far as who liked this event, this project, and who didn’t, I’d say the viewers were about 50-50,” McInnes estimated. “But with Proud Boys it was like 80 percent, ‘Fuck Gavin McInnes.’”
I think McInnes’s reported numbers are about as credible as Amazon’s reported numbers for Dem Rangz o’ Power. I don’t see how anyone could possibly like the so-called event; it was always a lose-lose proposition.
But don’t forget what McInnes admitted, because it’s true of many, if not most, of political commentators. “I am a clown dancing for your entertainment!”
Was talking to [REDACTED] Bear at the festival and he said most conservatives are doing it, but Gavin is the one who was caught. Apparently Tim Pool pulled the same stunt, but years ago, and while he was “being detained” the YouTube livestream was left on for hours and holds some kind of record for the amount of money collected from superchats in one stream.
Just to be clear, the police do not simply respond blindly to calls as if they have no idea that they have ever been there before. Most public figures at genuine risk of being SWATted have already alerted the local police to the possibility, their address is already known to the police and flagged accordingly, and any attempt at SWATting will result in a telephone call, or at most, a visit from a squad car to confirm that everything is all right rather than an emergency response.
Anyone who gets SWATted multiple times is almost certainly faking it.
It turns out that it might actually be easier to get a post deleted or an account suspended on Truth Social than on Twitter. There is literally no reason for it to exist at all, except to let cuckservatives posture about how brave they are to leave Twitter.
Good morning to everyone except the 14 backstabbing, low-life, sellout, gun-grabbing Republican Senators who voted with the Democrats on gun control. Never give another dime to the GOP – they hate you.
We always knew conservatism was a fraudulent failure of a pseudo-ideological movement. But lo and behold, it turns out that the conservative movement is literally fake and gay:
Until a few days ago, few people outside the offices of National Review knew that the revered conservative magazine’s publisher is a homosexual, “married” to a man.
“The publisher of the most important conservative magazine of the last 60 years, National Review, is gay-married?” wrote The Stream’s Peter Wolfgang, who broke the story. “Garrett Bewkes, the man overseeing the magazine once edited by William F. Buckley, has a husband.”
“He’s been the publisher for five years. How did this happen? And what does it mean for the conservative movement and the Republican party?” Wolfgang asked. “I suspect a lot of NR’s long-time readers don’t know this. I wouldn’t have known if a local newspaper hadn’t run an article by Bewkes’ ‘husband’ Bradley.”
Just wait until conservatives learn that their historical opinion leader, William F. Buckley, was gay too, as was conservative icon Malcolm Forbes. This is why one has to be either stupid or ignorant to call oneself a political “conservative” – something you may recall that I have never, ever, done – because conservatism is not only not an ideology, it is an intellectual, political, and moral dead end that couldn’t even conserve the difference between a girl and a boy.
Dear Christians: Jews have absolutely no desire whatsoever to be co-opted and absorbed into your religion. Judeo-Christian is not a thing that exists. Your attempt to erase us is blatant. Bonus education for you: Jewish beliefs require access to abortion.
They really don’t. Some of them worship Holocaustianity, many of them are irreligious, some of them worship Mammon, and the very worst of them worship Satan. What they don’t worship, under any circumstances, is the Almighty God, the Father of Jesus Christ. Given the way they rejected Him about 30 seconds after leaving Egypt, on what basis could you possibly believe that they haven’t in the last 2,000+ years?
Jewish identity is heavily dependent upon the rejection of Christianity; to become a Christian is to cease being a Jew. It is therefore overtly anti-Christian in a way that most other religions are not.
There is no such thing as “judeo-christianity”. America is not, and never was, a “Judeo-Christian nation”. It was, and is, a Christian nation. The fact that the United States is no longer the American nation-state it once was doesn’t change that.
I’ve been reading a recent biography of Franco, a relatively new one by a left-leaning pair of historians that purports to be neither a vicious condemnation of the evil fascist dictator nor a hagiography of the great nationalist hero. One-fifth of the way through, it does appear to be a fairly balanced presentation, even though the authors make it clear that they are men of the moderate Left.
One lesson that leaped out from the text is the intrinsic problem of allowing cuckservatives in positions of power. The problem of nominal centrists who a) are hostile to the Right and b) are soft on the Left is not exactly a new one.
Franco, ever an ordenancista, was appalled, believing that the president’s appeasement policy—so different from the adversarial relationship that Alcalá-Zamora adopted toward the moderate right—would only encourage revolutionism in the long term, with disastrous consequences. When the fighting still raged, he was quoted by the Italian chargé d’affaires as having told the latter that any failure to punish the insurrectionists firmly and fully would merely “encourage an early extremist response.” As events would reveal, the apolitical general understood his country’s political dynamics much better than the highly political president. Another extremist response was soon to follow.
In the perspective of contemporary European history, the repression of the revolutionary insurrection of October 1934 was comparatively mild. Key leaders were treated with leniency. Socialists were not proscribed unless they had been actively involved in the uprising, and most leftist deputies continued to sit in parliament. Within scarcely more than a year, full civil rights would be restored to all the left except for the imprisoned revolutionaries, and they would enjoy complete freedom to try to win at the ballot box what they had failed to achieve by violence. This formed a total contrast with the bloody repression of leftist insurrection in such countries as France, Germany, or Hungary. A case can be made that, in fact, the repression—far from being the atrocity alleged by the massive leftist propaganda campaign—was too limited and that only severe and successful prosecution of the revolutionaries would have made possible the survival of a parliamentary Republic.
Franco: A Personal and Political Biography, Stanley G. Payne with Jesus Palacios\
It’s more than a little appalling to see how easily some of the great tragedies of the past could have been prevented, if only those with the power and the responsibility to take action had done so. One can’t help but read the history of the Spanish Civil War without seeing the way in which President Trump similarly failed to grasp the bull by the horns and take the necessary action when he had the opportunity and the ability to do so.
And other parallels between the leadup to the Spanish Civil War and the current situation in the USA are not only apparent, they are more than a little ominous.
Conservatives are aggressively building their own apps, phones, cryptocurrencies and publishing houses in an attempt to circumvent what they see as an increasingly liberal internet and media ecosystem.
Why it matters: Many of these efforts couldn’t exist without the backing of major corporate figures and billionaires who are eager to push back against things like “censorship” and “cancel culture.”
The bottom line: Conservative media has been a powerhouse for a long time, but this phase of its expansion isn’t just about more or louder conservative voices — it’s about building an entire conservative ecosystem.
If they’re alarmed by the efforts of the gatekeepers to keep conservatives on an alternative plantation, imagine how freaked out they’re going to be when they realize the institutions that actually matter aren’t being built by conservatives and aren’t being controlled by either the Prometheans or their conservative pets.
On a not-unrelated note, you can now add additional subscriptions to your own account, including gift subscriptions for other people that will provide them with their own account, on UATV. And speaking of apps, they are coming in January for Android, iOS, and Roku.
Doug Wilson points out that discipline has never been a problem in the churches, it has merely been converged, twisted, and redirected:
This niceness vibe has been advanced in such a way as to make conservative believers think that they have been attending churches that have real trouble disciplining for error. But . . . not whether but which. In this world, it is absolutely necessary for every group that has defined boundaries to discipline for error, or for what they consider to be error.
Do you remember those times when conservative believers were chafing over the fact that no discipline ever seemed to be applied when young people drifted into sexual immorality, or into drugs? Or when middle aged businessmen abandoned their families and nothing happened? Or when someone announced that they were gay, and everyone thought it was a shame, but nobody did anything? It was easy back then to assume that this was because such churches didn’t know how to discipline.
But they did know how to discipline. Not whether but which. If you ever had pressed your concerns about the ongoing grab-assing in the youth group,, you would find out that they did know how to crack down on sin. They would crack down on you for your use of the word grab-assing in your letter to the session, which was totally unnecessary, and not becoming to one who names the name of Christ. In addition, they would discipline you for the legalistic spirit you were unfortunately starting to display. The discipline was there, just not aimed in the direction it ought to have been.
And how many churches over the last couple years have vigorously policed their congregations when it came to the wearing of masks? And they did this when to your knowledge they had never vigorously policed anything before. The one thing this should have told you is that they do know how to do it. They do know how to withstand pressure and blow back—but just from certain quarters. Not whether but which.
They had earlier refused to apply discipline in certain directions because they were concerned about the reaction they would get (from certain quarters). But on a different issue they applied discipline unambiguously and they were entirely unconcerned about the reaction they would get (from other quarters). When it came to you and your concerns about your aunt, who didn’t want to get the jab or wear a mask, but who had the antibodies, they were a rock wall. When it came to the concerns of those whose feelings were hurt by a visiting speaker who spoke insensitively about sex roles in marriage, they were a mound of marshmallows. Not whether but which.
This was because they feared the CDC (and the people who feared the CDC), and they did not fear God (or the people who fear God). Some went this way because health is their god, and they feared the virus. Others did it because the state is their god, and they feared the voice of officialdom.
At this point, the average church – be it Catholic or Protestant – is more likely to expel you from the congregation for quoting a Biblical passage deemed excessively racist or judgemental than for having a gay affair with the pastor’s son-in-law.
The trailer for Tucker Carlson’s special about the Jan. 6 mob at the Capitol landed online on Oct. 27, and that night Jonah Goldberg sent a text to his business partner, Stephen Hayes: “I’m tempted just to quit Fox over this.”
“I’m game,” Mr. Hayes replied. “Totally outrageous. It will lead to violence. Not sure how we can stay.”
The full special, “Patriot Purge,” appeared on Fox’s online subscription streaming service days later. And last week, the two men, both paid Fox News contributors, finalized their resignations from the network.
In some ways, their departures should not be surprising: It’s simply part of the new right’s mopping up operation in the corners of conservative institutions that still house pockets of resistance to Donald J. Trump’s control of the Republican Party. Mr. Goldberg, a former National Review writer, and Mr. Hayes, a former Weekly Standard writer, were stars of the pre-Trump conservative movement. They clearly staked out their positions in 2019 when they founded The Dispatch, an online publication that they described as “a place that thoughtful readers can come for conservative, fact-based news and commentary.” It now has nearly 30,000 paying subscribers.
Their departures also mark the end of a lingering hope among some at Fox News — strange as this is for outsiders to understand — that the channel would at some point return to a pre-Trump reality that was also often hyperpartisan, but that kept some distance from Republican officials.
Notice how small their actual following is, despite the fact that these guys have been getting massive amounts of media exposure for decades and the probability that The Dispatch is being propped up by the same people that keep National Review and the American Enterprise Institute going and going and going.
This doesn’t mean that Fox News can be trusted in the slightest. But it’s demonstrating, once more, that the Right’s erstwhile opinion leaders were always anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Western gatekeepers. You can always tell the self-appointed moderate, they love the word “thoughtful” more than the average gamma loves the word “actually”.
Virginia Republican Governor-elect Glenn Youngkin will reportedly allow local mask and vaccine mandates to be implemented, including in K-12 public schools. Glenn Youngkin, the Republican Governor-elect of Virginia, will be allowing localities in the state – including cities, counties, and public school systems – to implement mask and vaccine mandates, but says he will not impose a mandate at the state level.
Republicans are all about the surrender game. The most important thing is to never, ever go on the offensive. Just defend and retreat, then defend and retreat again.
This is why I didn’t give a damn which of the two uniparty candidates won the governorship. At this point in time, “mildly less disastrous” is not going to accomplish anything that matters.