Counter-Currents
2,292 words
Trump Becomes First Ex-President to Be Charged with a Crime; USA Today Immediately Brands Him a Jew-Hater
In the eyes of many, former President Donald Trump was the most slavishly, slobberingly pro-Jewish president in history. But almost immediately after a grand jury indicted him on business fraud charges brought by black Manhattan prosecutor Alvin Bragg relating to $130,000 in hush-money payments Trump allegedly made to big-breasted blonde porno star Stormy Daniels only days before the 2016 election that catapulted him into the Oval Office, USA Today saw fit to wrangle the story into an imaginary tale of Trump’s allegedly roaring Jew-hatred.
Headlined “Donald Trump using antisemitic [sic] rhetoric to get political donations after indictment,” the article is a textbook case of media obfuscation, manipulation, and shameless bullshit. The first four paragraphs are a startling example of how some people — who SHALL NOT BE NAMED — will make everything, no matter how unrelated to Jews, all about Jews:
Less than two hours after his indictment became public, former President Donald Trump’s fundraising machine sent out an email to supporters on his behalf loaded with extremist rhetoric and antisemitic [sic] tropes.
“The Deep State will use anything at their disposal to shut down the one political movement that puts YOU first,” Trump wrote in the email, a reference to a conspiracy theory about a network of people working inside the federal government to exercise power over ordinary people.
Trump also attacked Manhattan prosecutor Alvin Bragg, whose office was responsible for bringing the case to the grand jury, as being funded by George Soros, a major donor to Democratic causes and a popular target of anti-Semitism on the far-right, including in his birth country of Hungary.
“They’re loaded with antisemitic [sic] language, some of which has been used in the past to validate violence against Jews,” said Kurt Braddock, a public communication professor at American University. “There’s no other way to describe it — he’s using anti-Jewish stereotypes and historical hatred to raise money.”
Holy flaming shit-covered matzo balls, where does one even begin to unpack the lies here? How was USA Today able to go from zero to six million miles per hour that quickly?
Of course there are other ways to describe what Trump posted. First off, Trump’s post didn’t mention Jews once. Second, although George Soros is Jewish, he did boast to Steve Kroft of 60 Minutes in a 1998 interview that he hid with a Christian family during the Second World War and helped relieve his co-Jews of their property as they were sent off to concentration camps. Soros expressed not even a glimmer of remorse for his actions which, in the scheme of things, sounds much more “anti-Semitic” than Trump’s post in the wake of his historic criminal indictment.
Trump is scheduled to be arraigned in Manhattan at 2:15 PM EST on Tuesday. Whether or not there is a real potential for street violence or authorities in the Big Apple are merely being dramatic, the city plans to close some streets around the courthouse hosting the indictment. Trump also faces possible additional charges relating to cash payments he purportedly made to 1998 Playboy Playmate of the Year Karen McDougal — which, to my eyes, only makes him sound cooler.
The hush-money charges against Trump are allegedly tied to election interference rather than simply trying to tell some spread-eagled strumpet to keep her mouth shut, which is why they may have some legal legs upon which to stand. But many law experts say these charges are, by far, the weakest criminal charges that Trump potentially faces. They say that potential future charges related to allegedly attempting to overthrow the 2020 election and salting away classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago abode may present more trouble for the famously brash and blustery former Chief Executive.
Douglass “Ricky Vaughn” Mackey Convicted of Doing a Little Bit More Than Simply “Posting a Meme”
On the same day that Trump was indicted, former “social media influencer” Douglass Mackey was convicted in federal court — which also happened to be in New York City, and involving allegations brought by a black US attorney with the unmistakably black name of Breon Peace— for the crime of election interference related to an image he posted on his Twitter account days before the 2016 presidential election.
Mackey, who used the screen name “Ricky Vaughn” — a reference to a fictional baseball pitcher played by HIV-addled actor Charlie Sheen in the 1989 film Major League — faces up to ten years in prison in what many are calling a clear violation of his First Amendment rights for merely “posting a meme” that was obviously satirical.
Well, it’s a little bit more complicated than that, as all things tend to be in these days of ideological partisanship that is so blind, both Ray Charles and Helen Keller would be impressed.
The “meme” in question contains an image of a black woman holding a Hillary Clinton campaign poster. According to a Department of Justice press release from Friday:
As proven at trial, between September 2016 and November 2016, Mackey conspired with other influential Twitter users and with members of private online groups to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages that encouraged supporters of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to ‘vote’ via text message or social media which, in reality, was legally invalid. For example, on November 1, 2016, in or around the same time that Mackey was sending tweets suggesting the importance of limiting ‘black turnout,’ the defendant tweeted an image depicting an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for Hillary” sign. The ad stated: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home,” “Text “Hillary” to 59925,’”and “Vote for Hillary and be a part of history.” The fine print at the bottom of the deceptive image stated: “Must be 18 or older to vote. One vote per person. Must be a legal citizen of the United States. Voting by text not available in Guam, Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii. Paid for by Hillary For President 2016.” The tweet included the typed hashtag “#ImWithHer,” a slogan frequently used by Hillary Clinton. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “Hillary” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which had been used in multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by Mackey and his co-conspirators.
According to multiple sources, anyone who texted “Hillary” to the 59925 number received a return message stating:
The ad you saw was not approved by iVisionMobile OR Hillary For America in any way. To opt-in to the real HFA list, text HFA to 47246. Reply STOP to cancel.
The return message that people who texted that number received didn’t say anything such as “SIKE! Just fooled you!” All it said that was the ad was not officially approved by the Clinton campaign. It did not say anything remotely in the realm of “You didn’t just really vote, muh nigga — you’re going to have to get your fat ass down to a polling center on Election Day.” Now, seeing as how many voters — but probably especially black ones — have trouble with reading comprehension and are notoriously lazy and shiftless, it’s understandable how some of these nearly 5,000 would-be voters-by-text could have been hornswoggled into thinking they’d actually voted. The charges that the feds brought implicitly suggested that voters aren’t the brightest bulbs on the Christmas tree.
Many have pointed out that Kristina Wong, an Asian alleged comedienne, did exactly the same thing that Mackey did, but evaded criminal charges when she tweeted the following on the day before the 2016 presidential election:
Hey Trump Supporters! Skip poll lines at #Election2016 and TEXT in your vote! Text votes are legit. Or vote tomorrow on Super Wednesday!
But the one substantial difference between Wong and Mackey’s tweets is that Wong didn’t provide an actual functional number to text, so no one was able to follow up and fall under the delusion that they’d actually voted.
You can buy Jim Goad’s ANSWER Me! here.
The other substantial difference between Wong’s and Mackey’s tweets is that Mackey doesn’t have slanted eyes and a vagina.
It’s also a fact that Mackey wasn’t even charged until a few days after Joe Biden was inaugurated, which strongly stinks of Democratic malice, bias, and weaponization of federal power — which I was told back in grade school was supposed to be unbiased, non-malicious, and entirely odor-free.
Mackey was a substantial player in the “Optics War” that erupted in the wake of the Charlottesville disaster and which I will always believe was an ultimately destructive and divisive way of fracturing whatever shaky coalition the Alt Right had built up to that point. It will always be my contention that the main villains in Charlottesville were the police, antifa, and the media. I maintain that the focus and animus should have targeted them rather than ideological allies who may have only differed in terms of style, strategy, hygiene, and economic class.
In a post on Telegram, “Unite the Right” organizer Jason Kessler accused Mackey of “treasonous backstabbing” against the failed rally’s would-be participants. A commenter under an Unz Review article on Mackey’s conviction accused Mackey of being “a subversive rat who worked for Jewish zionist [sic] Richard Schwartz to undermine the American right wing for Likud.”
Ouch.
Tradfags in Denial: Ali “Scammy Davis, Jr.” Alexander & Milo Yiannopoulos Have a Super-Gay Slapfight Over #YE24’s Corpse
Speaking of infighting and the stubborn (and apparently incurable) tendency of attention whores to backstab one another in their eternal quest to hog the spotlight, it appears that Kanye West’s much-lauded attempts to run for president in 2024 are deader than a fetus in an abortion-clinic dumpster.
Two of the main e-celebs who attached themselves barnacle-like to West’s would-be campaign — which appeared to have no clear policy agenda besides having the famously unstable rapper naming the Jew wherever and whenever he could — locked horns last week over which one of them was the “real” Christian and which one of them was a sneaky-snake and active predatory homosexual.
It’s a matter of record that Milo Yiannopoulos spoke with the FBI regarding the Charlottesville disaster. It’s also an undeniable fact that Ali Alexander — born Ali Abdul Razaq Akbar and self-proclaimed “Father of Dragons” and hater of “hillbillies” — spoke to a federal grand jury regarding his involvement with the “Stop the Steal” movement and the resultant January 6 disaster.
Last November, along with Kanye West and some diminutive Mexican virgin who says that “having sex with women is gay,” Yiannopoulos visited Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago residence for dinner. Yiannopoulos later claimed that he arranged the dinner “just to make Trump’s life miserable.”
Yiannopoulos and Alexander have apparently been at loggerheads since 2021, when Milo “accused the Stop the Steal architect of setting up people at the Capitol riot.”
Regardless, they both jumped on the #YE24 bandwagon. When and how they did so, and whether lubrication was involved, is a matter of speculation. Both of them apparently protested the other’s involvement, which eventually saw Yiannopoulos being squeezed out of the campaign. It seems very likely that Milo’s departure was in some way related to the leaking of numerous public posts he’d made last summer alleging that Kanye West is gay, or at least bisexual.
In February, West married a phenotypically white woman named Bianca Censori whom some claim is an ethnic Italian but whom others claim, without any evidence I’ve seen so far, is an ethnic Jew. Last week, I reported on how West, after viewing Jewish chubster Jonah Hill in the 2012 movie 21 Jump Street, says that he likes Jews again, proving my long-held contention that West is a political thinker of the highest order.
It’s unclear to me exactly what lit the fuse that set off the very public slapfight between Yiannopoulos and Alexander, but it was very heavy on the “I’m not an active fag — you are” and “You’re not a real Christian — I am” messaging.
I’ve never seen any evidence of Alexander, whom I’ve always found to be an intensely greasy and repulsive personage, being capable of squeezing out even one droplet of humor. If last week’s battle royale is to be judged by which of them had the best zingers, Yiannopoulos won by a landslide.
I also found two cases in which the sources cited by Alexander claimed that he was lying. One was Michael Voris, the “ex-gay” leader of radical TradCath organization The Church Militant, who publicly refuted Alexander’s contention that the organization had cut ties with Milo. Another refutation came from a white man in his 20s who denied to me that Milo had sexually groomed him, although he confirmed Alexander’s allegation that Yiannopoulos had physically threatened him.
Yiannopoulos gleefully unleashed upon the world an array of alleged screen caps containing purported discussions between Alexander and young white males that at least appear to establish a pattern of Alexander sexually flirting with them — which, if you’re familiar with The Holy Bible, is something that No True Christian is supposed to do. Such screen caps include one where Alexander asks an unidentified male to show him his penis and telling another young white man that “I find your jawline cute and powerful. And your lips cute and curious” and that “You should be strip teasing for dad.”
When confronted with the allegation that he, too, has been prone to very publicly flouting a proclivity toward faggin’ off, Yiannopoulos countered that the “crucial difference” between him and Alexander is that he has “acknowledged my sinful and disordered urges,” whereas Alexander remains hidden in a closet large enough to cram a million young white dicks.
For the record, Alexander has claimed that all of Milo’s screen caps have been fabricated and has publicly warned Yiannopoulos that “America First bites back, fat Jewish foreign peddler.”
At press time, the main thing that remains unclear is exactly what bodily organ Alexander, AKA “Scammy Davis, Jr.,” intends to bite.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “Paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
54 comments
The fact that Milo was considered the “public face” of the Right in the US (along with that closeted fag Spencer) only shows how utterly disfunctional the “movement” was, and still is.
You simply can’t get mileage out of creeps.
Milo was not “the ‘public face'” of the Right, and Richard Spencer is not a homosexual. No need to exaggerate.
Yeah, at least there’s evidence that Spencer has bred with women. This article wasn’t about Spencer, but it did make a passing reference to a Mexican midget who has never been with a woman and says that “having sex with women is gay.” Why so mum on that “public face”?
I think Fuentes is hilarious. Especially when he says things like “Having sex with women is gay.”
That’s fucking awesome!!!
Gavin and Anthony played the clip of jimmy kimmel playing the fuentes gay clip and thought it was great. Obviously a joke, though im losing faith in these younger guys. Fuentes is popular because he had a daily show for white guys’ news. Its not a difficult formula, just time consuming.
Yeah, it was “obviously” a joke, especially because he’s never had sex with a woman and surrounds himself with catboys and backstabbing dick-riders.
There is a lot to dislike about Fuentes, but there’s quite a bit of autism with being unable to distinguish a joke from a confession. Why would a homosexual say ‘having sex with women is gay?’ If he is ‘gay’ then he would have sex with women right? As for the catboy thing…come on already. You actually believe they rehearsed a gay sex scene on camera and then went off camera and had gay sex? This is embarrassing. It was clearly a failed skit, so much so that he banished the Aussie after that, who has since been revealed to have an unsavory past. Basically, this rhetoric is either in bad faith or suffocating autism. Fuentes has dropped the stupid Zoomer shtick for the most part since he toured with Ye. Being a virgin at his age despite his status is indeed strange, but virginity doesn’t equal homosexual. Did you forget Tim Tebow?
Please tell me you’re pretending to be this dumb. No one who’s able to draw logical inferences would infer that I said he’s gay. No one with rudimentary reading-comprehension skills would infer that I saw his statement as either a joke OR a confession—I saw it as more a statement of policy for the clueless members of Incels, Inc. that hang on his every word. What I’ve repeatedly called him is a virgin. He’s someone emotionally arrested on the cusp of adolescence who calls EVERYTHING and EVERYONE gay…except for the obviously gay people who surround him. If there’s truly such a thing as “gaydar,” he has the complete opposite of it. And that’s the only truly hilarious thing about him.
Also, he didn’t “banish the Aussie” until much later, when the Aussie started quoting Hitler at public gatherings.
‘Yeah, it was “obviously” a joke, especially because he’s never had sex with a woman and surrounds himself with catboys and backstabbing dick-riders.’
Just own it. You’re making the case of guilt by association that so many ‘wignats’ made before Fuentes did the Ye tour because of some strange grievance. It is reminiscent of how liberals of the Bush era hated him and the GOP, not because of the neocon warmongering, but because he came across as inarticulate, and thus bruised their egos in some inscrutable way. You either believe Fuentes is gay or you don’t. He’s indeed a weird guy. Proclaiming asexuality in your early 20s is incredibly bizarre and not much better than homosexuality in my opinion, but it still isn’t the same thing, especially considering homosexuality is subversively political and asexuality isn’t.
You’re trying to make an entirely different argument now taking issue with reflexively using ‘gay’ as in the late 90s/early 2000s ‘That’s gay’ phrase kids used to use as a cognate of ‘stupid,’ which is odd considering Fuentes is a Zoomer and nobody says this anymore. But you didn’t make this clear at all and it seems like you’re being tactical here.
‘Having sex with women is gay’ is an incredibly bizarre statement. So bizarre that it’s funny in an original way. He is a funny guy. Sometimes as a comedian your jokes do not land at all. Some of his jokes have clearly bombed, like the catboy thing, whom he did banish after the fallout of this and the wignat thing when he realized the guy really was a toxic fruit loop rather than somebody he can leverage like Milo or these other goofballs who got picked up by Cuckservative outlets and has since disassociated from him.
I don’t really care one way or another about ‘e-celebs’ or this stupid gossip, but I care about the principle of cheap slander, especially under the ‘wignat’ autism that completely engulfed this sphere for several years and derailed the movement, and because Fuentes alone is actually mainstreaming the narrative right now whether you like him or not. If you don’t believe that he’s actually gay with his failed jokes, fine, but plenty of ‘wignat’ autists, using your syntax almost word-for-word about ‘catboys’ and ‘sex with women is gay,’ absolutely do.
Like Greg above claims Spencer isn’t gay and is protecting him against slander despite being enemies. I used to think he was gay too. I think he is irreparably toxic, but I’ve seen enough evidence that he isn’t actually gay, so I won’t slander him as a homosexual anymore. I will just label him a performative contrarian too valueless to ever be taken seriously again.
As for ‘gaydar,’ Fuentes clearly uses his connections pragmatically and masterfully in ways I haven’t seen anybody else here come close to manifesting. TRS even tried to name-drop allegedly dining with Peter Thiel. It’s just embarrassing.
Sections on Trump and Vaughn: good content and style, as usual.
Section on Milo and some other guy I never heard of and their tawdry carryins-on: why?
The sooner these weasels gnaw one another to death, the better for the Right. It amazes me that Milo has betrayed the confidences of people, bragged about his “vault” of kompromat, and people continue to associate with him. As for Scammy Davis, Jr.: You know that Republicans associate with this hideous and sleazy character because it is worse to be thought a racist than a pedophile. Fuentes really has terrible judgment about his associates.
Milo was a BOSS. Very few people could extemporize in a public forum as well as he did. (Remember the give and take on Australian news shows? Articulate doesn’t even begin to describe it.)
Sadly, though, he’s having a very long Norma Desmond moment. If only he could direct that wicked wit toward his current performance.
when he was on, he was rock star material. Not right wing at all but at least anti feminism and anti sjw ideology. Funny “sjw” isnt even used anymore, compared to “woke.” Anyway maybe he’ll be useful someday since he sounds more race realist, though marrying a black dude is a dark skeleton in his closet
Thank you Jordan Peterson for posting this in reference to Scotland’s new “PM”:
“By what standards is he not “white”? Is he not white like Italians, Jews and Irishmen were once not “white”?” Hey Jordan, what is black, what is yellow, what is a woman? Thank you Jordan for exposing what you are – a traitor.
I am so tired of the argument that goes something like, “since others have been wrong about a subject (e.g. race) in the past, anyone is permitted to be wrong about the same subject, now.”
Who but a dishonest dealer with a harmful agenda even thinks like that?
I think you should replace “anyone” with “everyone.” It makes more sense.
Why do you object to “anyone”?
Actually, I’d change the whole sentence to “Since others have been wrong about a subject (e.g. race) in the past, everyone is very likely wrong about it now.”
“Everyone” is preferable to “anyone” for some reason I can’t pinpoint at the moment; and, with all due respect, “permitted” is weak.
I say ‘anyone’ is the correct choice in your sentence.
Thank you, Enoch Powell. I agree.
* * *
JC, I get the impression your real quibble is not with word choice. So come on, out with it.
No. It really is a “quibble” with the phrasing. “Anyone” comes off as indefinite, yet Peterson’s formula is sweeping in it’s intent. His argument is an attempt to put an end to such racial or ethnic claims completely. I think a stronger response is warranted
You need to learn the difference between “its” and “it’s” before you even can pretend to claim quibbling rights.
“Anyone” basically means the same thing as “everyone.” I’m aware of the niggling difference—one individualizes the same concept, while the other collectivizes it. But it means the same thing. It’s why the phrase “each and every” is redundant.
Any excuse to use “niggling” is top dog, each and every time. 🙂
Replying to Shift:
Not always
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z86Tuc_zOWU
Ha. Point taken, Fire Walk With Lee. My comment was removed.
I have my great grandparents’ immigration records from sicily. Theres a big fat W in the race column. No institutions ever claimed irish or italians werent white. It was a schoolyard, slanderous way to compare their rambunctious behavior to blacks, like calling pollacks dumb.
It’s a disingenuous argument that certain (((academics))) make lately, to say Irish and Italians were considered non-White, of course leading into “race is only a social construct, therefore it’s not real, QED.” Of course, it’s a load of crap. If Irish and Italians had been considered non-White, then they never would’ve been able to get into the country until 1965. The dishonesty that these types will go to is unreal.
“If Irish and Italians had been considered non-White, then they never would’ve been able to get into the country until 1965.”
That’s a great point!
* * *
People who argue like this might as well say, “You know, people used to think that demons, not germs, made people sick; and since people used to think demons made a person sick, this woman with a wiener is whatever she claims to be.”
It is, in other words, a complete non sequitur.
“The dishonesty that these types will go to is unreal.” Jordan Peterson’s role in our extermination is to help in preventing us Europeans from coming together, from uniting. The evil people behind the scene conducting our planned extermination fear our collectivizing, they know from history of our strength if we came together (uniting is our only salvation, our enemies are working 24/7 in trying to prevent that).
Exactly. The Irish, etc. were always legally and officially considered white. Peterson’s argument is based on a false premise.
Interesting. And as Beau pointed out, pre-1965 they wouldn’t have been allowed in were they not considered white.
Good point!! I grew up in the Chicago suburbs in the 1960s and 1970s and we had tons of pollack jokes. But nobody ever really thought that Polish people were stupid. We didn’t have jokes about Irish and Italians though. In my Catholic grade school I had good friends who were grandsons or great grandsons of Irish, Italian and Polish immigrants and they were certainly not stupid.
Re the Peterson quote:
Scotland’s new PM is not a Celt, Anglo-Saxon, Pict, or Viking. That is what is meant by “not white” and that is what matters. However, he IS a Muslim with complete disdain for freedom of speech.
So much for the Scottish Enlightenment.
Scotland does not have a prime minister. It has a first minister. A serial failure, anti-white racist dickhead Asian.
Politics in Scotland is completely, permanently broken. Just the way Westminster wants.
Something is broken in Scotland and has been for a long time. I really thought back in 2014 they would have voted to leave the UK but the idea of leaving England’s tax money behind was too much and they voted to stay on welfare. And now they have a muslim for first minister when muslims are approx 1.5% of their population (bettered by Ukraine’s jewish president as his people are less than 1% of that population).
And to think of all the great men that came from Scotland now replaced by an army of drug abusers.
Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn’t it more anti-Catholic sentiment that was the reason for Irish and Italians not being welcome?
In unrelated news, Agatha Christie novels are being revised to edit out insensitive remarks about Jews.
No, it’s not really happening! Cancel culture isn’t real, haven’t you heard? Oh, and when it is real, they totally deserved it, except it’s never really real. Or something.
Douglass Mackey is one more political prisoner. Posting a joke on the Internet is not a crime. That is self-evident. Liberals don’t like the joke, because it mocks the stupidity of Clinton voters.
The DOJ lawyers are working for the Democratic Party. They prosecute anyone opposed to it. They want to create a fictional narrative where Republicans steal elections and Democrats do not. That is the exact opposite of the truth, as everyone knows. They are just a new variant of communist, for whom lying is second nature. They censor, persecute and murder anyone opposed to them.
The Great Replacement is a fact, and White genocide (by Jews and their tools) is real. The US agencies are now run by communists and perverts, as are many Democrat judges.
A joke could be a crime. More to the point, it was not a crime under the law he was charged with, which bars conspiring “to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person” so as to deny him constitutional rights. The meme did not do any of those things. Furthermore, the list of exceptions to the First Amendment is short and specific, and his act doesn’t fall under any of the known exceptions, at least insofar as the vote suppression claim goes.
Perhaps it could be judged illegal in some other way, e.g. by illegally using trademarks of Microsoft and the Hillary campaign, but that’s not what he was charged with.
I think what he did was probably a crime, but only because he was pro-white. As demonstrated by that Oriental woman or the conspiracy to defraud the voters in multiple states in 2020 it’s the standard anarcho-tyranny model. Do as we say not as we do.
Imagine going on and on about “optics” while associating with an openly gay and profoundly mentally unstable man who has offered to inform for the FBI on Twitter and a black felon who is an accused pederast.
The death of “America First” and Amnats has been interesting.
Rounding out the optically pristine, politically serious, and inevitably victorious AF inner circle are dunderheaded, digitally raised bottle babies such as Baked Alaska, Ethan Ralph, and Beardson Beardly.
Regarding the recent round of AF seppuku, someone messaged me this:
“Yeah the Milo/Ali/Nick trifecta was certainly a lot of fun. It’s almost like the majority of level-headed spectators repeatedly warned this exact scenario would play out. But what makes this saga even more delectable is seeing the same group who dedicated years to polishing Milo’s testicles now accuse the rest of us of cozying up to a gay pedophilic grifter just because we’re laughing.”
That’s another point that doesn’t get mentioned nearly enough about this clown car whose wheels are falling off: They obviously have no real convictions and change opinions the moment the wind changes. Everyone seems to forget they were ALL on the Andrew Yang train for a hot minute…then back to Daddy Trump. Then it was Kanye West…until Kanye saw 21 Jump Street.
They do the same thing regarding who’s “based” and who isn’t. Because they are all shameless clout addicts, they were all sucking up to Milo until he turned on them. Then out came the “I never liked him anyway” disavowals. Same with their feelings toward Patrick Casey. And Jaden McNeil.
Replying to the bold, brave anon “Anti-Zionist” because these threads disable replying after a certain point, probably because the indent increases with each reply:
Just own it. You’re making the case of guilt by association that so many ‘wignats’ made before Fuentes did the Ye tour because of some strange grievance.
No, you’re making a false inference, because I know exactly what I meant, and I explained it.
If I wanted to say he’s gay, you know how I’d go about it? I’d say, “He’s gay.” I never tiptoe around making direct statements for fear of social disapproval like most of the world seems to do.
Besides, what you’re imputing makes zero sense. A gay person would say, “Having sex with women is what hetero breeders do—eww!” They’d say the precise opposite of what he said. A heterosexual would say, “Having sex with women is great!” A virgin—which is what I’ve always called him—would say, “Having sex with women is gay!” in the sense that “gay” means “dumb.”
I saw it as neither a joke nor a confession, but you’re claiming the ability to read my mind and are calling me a liar, which is quite convenient, because that’s something that can’t be proved or disproved. This is why “appeal to motive” is a primary logical fallacy. I don’t claim the ability to read your mind, and from the looks of things, I’d never want to see what actually motivates you.
Then you whine about “slander” while calling me “autistic” and a “wignat” and saying I’m operating in “bad faith” which imputing false motives to me. You can’t argue for shit, but you don’t have the honor to own that. Or maybe you can’t even see that you can’t argue for shit. I’ll hold open that possibility. Again, I’m not a mind-reader.
Fuentes clearly uses his connections pragmatically and masterfully in ways I haven’t seen anybody else here come close to manifesting.
Well, bully for him! Too bad he has to be absolutely duplicitous and contradict himself every five minutes to accomplish it, though. And too bad for him that people are finally starting to see through him. Too bad that he winds up blowing most of his connections and alienating most of his most trusted confidants.
If I cared about “connections” or clout or anything but directly speaking my mind, I would act completely differently. It should be pretty evident to anyone with the most meager intuition that popularity has never been my goal.
It is ironic this guy is accusing you be being spergy.
I’ve noticed that accusing someone of being autistic is often a tactic employed by someone who is being thrashed by someone who is far more logical than they are.
It might be best if the whole tempest in a teapot was just dropped, but I can’t help but ask. I admit to the same inference that others have made, that by the following you meant to imply, perhaps jokingly, that Fuentes might be gay: “Yeah, it was ‘obviously’ a joke, especially because he’s never had sex with a woman and surrounds himself with catboys and backstabbing dick-riders.”
You’ve since made clear what you didn’t mean, but given all the digital ink spilled over guessing and arguing, would you mind clarifying what you did mean?
I already explained it upthread, so I’ll just paste it again:
No one who’s able to draw logical inferences would infer that I said he’s gay. No one with rudimentary reading-comprehension skills would infer that I saw his statement as either a joke OR a confession—I saw it as more a statement of policy for the clueless members of Incels, Inc. that hang on his every word.
What I saw him saying was, “Don’t have sex with women, listen to male virgins like me who do nothing but complain about women AND fags, and keep sending me superchat money!”
I also elaborated with the following statement only a few comments above your question:
Besides, what you’re imputing makes zero sense. A gay person would say, “Having sex with women is what hetero breeders do—eww!” They’d say the precise opposite of what he said. A heterosexual would say, “Having sex with women is great!” A virgin—which is what I’ve always called him—would say, “Having sex with women is gay!” in the sense that “gay” means “dumb.”
If anyone sees what he said as a “joke,” explain the punchline. It seemed like a statement and possibly even an 11th Commandment: “Thou shalt not covet women and shall remain a virgin like me” rather than a joke.
The thing about hanging around catboys and dick-riders was a statement about the irony of someone who calls everyone “faggots” and is always screaming about “degeneracy” having terrible gaydar.
And, yeah, always screaming about “traditionalism” and “the family” and “Catholicism” seems mighty hypocritical when you spend your life entirely online, haven’t had sex with a woman, and don’t go to Mass (according to everyone who knows him).
I wouldn’t be surprised if there are Republicans greasing the wheels for a Trump indictment. If still around he stands to split the vote, siphoning away votes from a more viable candidate like DeSantis. Trump does not like to lose and gives the impression he will fight to the bitter end. While I can respect the fighting tenacity, he proves more embarrassing by the minute. Perhaps he would enjoy being a TV pundit much more than the grief of a 2nd term, but he wages on.
I am of the optics matter camp (undermining my credibility with habitual typos). I know plenty of leftists, moderates, conservatives and Jews. Yes, even plenty of (((them))) are conservative and don’t fit the mold often on display here, just as Robin DiAngelo isn’t an emissary for all white people.
Most are too preoccupied with personal matters to delve too deeply into analyzing politics. But their sympathies are easily molded by bite sized news showing the right behaving stupidly. They all start paying attention much more closely when some aspect of the news starts to actually menace their home front (crime, the economy, home sales). I can’t imagine any of them are going to awaken from anything Fuentes has to say, so lost in irony and trolling there are few lasting points. But maybe he and his followers will grow up, that is if they haven’t permanently marred their reputations.
All this AF nonsense reminds me of what Greg said about young people in the movement:
Don’t trust anyone under 30.
Some of the wisest council to come from the wise one. And that’s saying something.
Was this feud between Milo and Alexander on some podcast or just your run of the mill social media trolling?
I really don’t know what to make of the whole Milo, Ye, and Fuentes thing let alone these people on their own. Ye kind of went out like a fart in the wind, then came back saying he likes Jews now. It sort of begs the question with Milo playing the turncoat why anyone would want to have anything to do with this guy. It sort of begs the question if he’s some sort of grifter. That being said, I do miss the Milo trolling tour circa 2015-2016. I think Fuentes had the potential to really start a legit political movement. He was getting a lot of followers, I think he even spoke at an American Renaissance conference and then was garnering the attention of a least one Congressman. I think Fuentes enjoys more the entertainment aspect of what he does than the actual activism. There’s also the whole catboi thing, and “trusting the plan” and how “the catboi is actually really based.” I wish, Jayden I think his name is, Fuentes’ equivalent of consigliere would tell him to please ask a lady out for dinner.
Regarding the first section of this week’s “Worst Week Yet,” you ever notice how the first people to bring up Soros’ Jewish heritage isn’t the person who is criticizing George Soros rather it’s Jews themselves. Sort of not a very good look.
Jaden McNeil had a very public falling out with Fuentes about a year ago and made all sorts of unsavory allegations:
https://kiwifarms.net/threads/jaden-patrick-mcneil-jaden-mcneil-live-jadengang-jg4l.147724/
The Groypers went after him like the deranged cult they are, but he keeps hitting back on his Twitter page:
https://twitter.com/JadenPMcNeil
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment