All Episodes
Previous Next
March 16, 2019 - America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes
01:10:54
Islamic Terror in the Netherlands | America First Ep. 349
Participants
Main voices
n
nick fuentes
01:00:52
Appearances
Clips
a
alex jones
00:13
d
donald j trump
00:04
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
unidentified
Thank you.
Thank you.
Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.
It's going to be only America first.
America first.
The American people will come first once again.
With respect, the respect that we deserve.
From this day forward, it's going to be only America first.
alex jones ▲ ● ▼
America first. . . . . . . . . . . .
unidentified
Thank you.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Good evening, everybody.
You're watching America First.
My name is Nicholas J. Fuentes.
We have a great show for you tonight.
Very excited to be back with you this week.
And there is a lot to discuss already.
And some more bad news.
Some more bad news.
Some good news about the show.
Some bad news about the world.
Of course, tonight we'll be talking about the latest, what appears to be a terror attack.
We can't exactly say quite yet what the motivation was, but Maybe some people can speculate or assume, but there was a shooting today in the Netherlands, which we will be talking about.
And of course, that has a lot to do with what we talked about on Friday.
Some are saying it could be a terror attack.
Some are saying it could be an honor killing, a family related shooting.
But either way, I think we all know that it has a lot to do with what happened on Thursday or Friday, depending on the time zone.
So we'll be discussing that.
We will be talking about Fox News, which is making some Decisions.
They're making some changes over there.
I wasn't actually going to talk about this, which is Judge Jeanine Pirro getting her show suspended this week after what she said about Sharia law.
And normally I wouldn't talk about that because talking about Muslims is so cliché.
It's so 2015.
You know, the idea that Sharia law is taking over the country, I mean, let's get real, right?
I mean, what's the other group that's already taken over the country, right?
So you understand this.
But I see that happen, which if you haven't been filled in on this, Judge Jeanine, she does her show weekly, I believe it's on Sunday, and it's a pretty high-rated show.
I'm a fan of hers.
I think she's got a little bit of energy.
She's very charged up whenever she's on the air.
But she got taken off the air.
And then today was announced that Fox News is hiring Donna Brazile.
They're hiring Donna Brazile.
So a lot of this stuff is a little bit corny, a little bit silly.
But there's a larger point to be made about the media, which we're going to get into.
You know, normally I don't care to talk about Muslims and Sharia law.
Judge Jeanine got taken off the air like some baby boomer.
And then Donna Brazile.
Remember in 2016?
And I feel like I should just put on the QAnon hat or something.
But, of course, there's a larger point about the media to be made, which we will be discussing tonight.
So, it's gonna be a packed show.
It's gonna be a fun show.
I gotta tell you, before we jump into it, last week we had some difficulty, and I talked about that a little bit on Friday.
We've been having some tech problems which is uh always right it's always something when we're um you know sort of an amateur show we don't have big investment don't we don't have big producers or anything like that but I want to say I just want to give you guys an update in spite of all of the tech problems last week was the biggest week of America First ever in terms of Viewership.
I think we had more than 23,000 views on the Yang video.
More than 20,000 on Friday's video.
Everything was more than 10,000 every show from Monday to Friday.
So it's always very exciting to see that.
Always great to see that.
And so it just goes to goes to show that we are winning.
We are getting vindicated, right?
Finally the message seems to be getting out there.
So we're excited about that.
And also be sure to check out our premium show Last night, finally.
People were giving me such a hard time about it last week, but we finally got it down.
We did a two-hour special to make up, because I know we missed a couple in the past.
So we did a two-hour premium show last night.
Pretty big show.
Which, I tweeted this out, I said, we're gonna have a big premium show.
And a lot of people said, oh, he's having E. Michael Jones on, he's having Owen Benjamin on.
Well, it's not big in terms of prestige, it's big in terms of volume, alright?
It's two hours.
And we talked about the Egg Boy meme, we talked about Senator... what is his name again?
I forget the name, but he's the senator from Queensland, Australia who wrote this pretty scathing press release after the New Zealand shootings.
We went over that and then we looked at the latest fireside chat from Dennis Prager.
Some very hot takes on that one, very interesting.
So be sure to check that out, but with that out of the way, I think that's everything.
In terms of housekeeping, I think we're just gonna have to dive right into it and go off.
I think we're just gonna have to go off about this because, you know, I saw this this afternoon, you know, and I started to browse the news and see what I'm gonna do for my show.
I see that you have this shooting in the Netherlands, and it's fascinating to me.
guess it shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody but when the shooting happens it's big coverage right when the shooting happens shots are being fired there's a manhunt they're trying to find the suspect for who's the the perpetrator of these killings it's all over twitter it's trending on twitter it's number one it's on the front page it's on all the news stories they capture the and then nothing.
And then you never hear about it again.
Isn't that funny how that works?
Because I remember when the manhunt was still going on, oh it's all over Twitter and people are speculating, who could be behind this?
What's the motivation?
Does it have something to do with New Zealand?
Is it a copycat attack?
Is it Islamic terror?
What could it be?
Well then they capture the suspect, the ID the suspect, and then you never hear about it.
Then suddenly it's not trending at all.
And I tweet out this evening, a little bit before the show, I said, why is nobody talking about the shooting in Utrecht in the Netherlands?
And people are replying, oh, well, you're talking about it.
Well, it is trending on Twitter.
No, it's not.
I'm on Twitter all day.
I would know.
It's nowhere to be found.
And of course, that's because the shooting today was perpetrated by a Muslim, naturally.
So we'll go over the details of the shooting.
This took place on a tram in the morning in a city called Utrecht in the Netherlands.
So a tram, this is public transportation, I guess, what is that?
Sort of like a streetcar, basically.
So this individual, he goes onto the tram, he opens fire, according to eyewitnesses, they say that he just starts shooting wildly.
He shoots a girl.
Somebody goes to tend to the wounds of the girl.
He shoots the people trying to help the girl.
Then he runs off the train.
He gets out of Dodge.
A manhunt is underway.
They put schools, hospitals, all kinds of public buildings on lockdown.
They elevate the terror threat.
Finally, they track him down and they ID the suspect as Gokman Tanis, a 37-year-old Turkish national.
He ends up killing three people, injuring five more in the shooting.
Police said that the shooting appears to be a terrorist incident, but at a press conference on Monday, a prosecutor said it could have been motivated by family reasons.
So like I said at the top of the show, The reason for the shooting, they say, could either be obviously motivated by jihad or whatever, you know, the more conventional, the typical Islamic terror, or it could simply be an honor killing.
It could be a family-related issue that, you know, somebody in the family, a sister, a mother, a wife, whomever, could have done something to violate Sharia law, and so he's naturally going to deliver the punishment there, the consequence.
suspect, rather the suspect, was known to police because of alleged ties to ISIS.
So apparently the Dutch police had actually picked this guy up before and then released him.
And they knew who he was because he was affiliated with ISIS and he had been fighting in Chechnya during the Chechen War, which if you remember the Chechen Wars were over this area in Russia, which declared independence after the dissolution of the Soviet Union as an Islamic country, as a sovereign Islamic So this guy was a fighter.
He was an ISIS affiliate.
He was known to Dutch police.
So I think it's fair to speculate that Probably more likely it was a terrorist incident.
But even if it wasn't, in any case, is this acceptable in a society?
I love all the waffling that goes on by the liberal press.
Well, we shouldn't jump to conclusions, right?
A shooting happens.
We shouldn't jump to conclusions that it's a Muslim.
It turns out it's a 37-year-old Turkish national Muslim.
It's a Muslim.
Well, we shouldn't jump to conclusions.
Maybe it wasn't terrorism.
It could have just been an honor killing.
Either way, it's not acceptable.
There were some false rumors, false reporting going around that said that this was...
An act of retribution for the New Zealand shooting.
That could be the case.
There's no evidence to support that.
I saw there was one source, which they didn't have any evidence for this, but they said that a note was left on the windshield of a car, which said that the shooting was in response to New Zealand.
That hasn't been corroborated by anybody.
They didn't release the contents of the note, so that's probably not true.
But in any case, we see this four or three days after the New Zealand shooting.
And what does it tell you?
I mean, what does this say?
How many hours between this shooting in New Zealand and another Muslim shooting?
And I don't think we feel good about being vindicated about something like this.
It's bloodshed.
It's a war that's going on.
A cultural war.
A civilizational war.
Perhaps a racial war.
A religious war.
So we're not happy about it, but it does just go to show, why do these things happen?
Why does what happened in New Zealand on Friday, why does something like that happen?
Maybe look at the events of today and you get somewhat of an idea.
And that's, again, that's not to justify, that's not to rationalize it, that's not to say, oh well, it actually makes a lot of sense once you look at...
What's going on?
But it does say that this is the inevitable consequence.
You're bringing over millions of these people.
What is a Turk doing in the Netherlands?
Seriously, why do you have a 37-year-old who is fighting in Chechnya for a Muslim state?
He's a Turk.
He's a Muslim.
What's this guy doing in the Netherlands?
Why should that mix?
He's got no business there.
But because he's there, because the government in the Netherlands has decided that it is a virtue, it is actually a positive good that we have different people with different ideologies, different belief systems, different cultures, living amongst your people in your schools, public transportation, where you work, etc.
Now three people are dead and five people are injured.
And of course, it's not on the same scale of the mosque shooting on Friday, right?
It's not on the same scale.
I don't think that really matters though.
Three dead, fifty dead.
We're talking about shootings.
We're talking about unnecessary violence.
And you look at these two events and they're obviously inextricably linked.
What radicalized the shooter in New Zealand who did the mass killing which we talked about a great length on Friday?
What was the one moment, the one event that radicalized him?
He said that he was traveling in Europe and then he saw the Stockholm truck attack in 2017.
And in particular there was a picture of a young girl named Ebba Ackerland, who I believe she was seven years old or eight years old or something.
Totally cut in half.
I mean, just severed right at the waist.
It was probably the most graphic picture, maybe next to the images from the 2015 Paris shootings, right?
If you saw that concert hall after that shooting.
It was maybe among the more graphic shootings to come out of these terrorist attacks.
A little girl just split in half.
And it was such an obscene thing.
He said he saw that and he decided, well, I'm going to take matters into my own hands, basically.
And, you know, you have to look at a situation like that.
And you have to look at a situation like the situation today and wonder, would you have the kind of right-wing terrorism?
It's very rare.
But when it happens, would you have that at all?
Would you have a mosque shooting?
If the government were doing something about this, If the government were even trying, if they were even attempting to prevent Islamic terror, or Muslim violence, or some of these other negative externalities from diversity, if they were even attempting to do something about that?
Do you think there would be as much radicalization?
Do you think there would be as much dissatisfaction, as much anger among the people?
Look at what's happening in Paris right now.
The Yellow Vest protests, which, again, if you watch Only Legacy Media, you wouldn't know this because they don't report on it, but the Yellow Vest protests are still going on, and they're still violent.
I think it's been 18 weeks?
It's been months, and the capital city of France is still on fire.
Because of the way the government handles public affairs there.
Do you think you would see this kind of violence on either side if we had a government that was actually taking care of its own people?
I don't think you would.
And then that's even besides the point.
A mosque shooting, a terrorist attack.
How could we prevent these things in the future?
Maybe if there were simply no mosques in New Zealand, there wouldn't be any mosque shootings in New Zealand.
Hmm, maybe if there were no Muslims in the Netherlands, you wouldn't see any Muslim terror attacks.
Now, you can't talk like that.
That's politically incorrect.
That's racist.
That's xenophobic and Islamophobic.
It is irrational to think like this.
It is hateful to think like this.
To propose the most common sense solution to these violent problems, You can't do that.
You can't do that because it's actually virtuous, it's actually moral to cram these different peoples together in the same countries, in the same developments, in the same towns, neighborhoods, schools, all the rest.
And I think that's the most twisted part about it because, you know, the simplest, the easiest answer to these problems, and it's really not that complicated, is you just don't have these people living together.
On both sides.
Let's give a little concession to the left and say, you know what, you're right.
The shooting last week, the shooting on Friday in the mosque, that was an example of white nationalist terrorism.
That is a problem.
White people do have a problem with political violence.
Maybe we're the only people with agency enough that white people do these kinds of attacks for political reasons and they're premeditated and they're elaborate and so on.
Maybe there's a reason for that.
Fair enough.
Well, here's a great idea.
You want to protect Muslims from white nationalist violence?
Great!
We want to protect white people from Muslim violence.
I've got the solution.
It's not hard.
There's no dump trucks filled with sand in front of the Christmas markets.
There's no TSA.
There's no...
X-ray scanners.
There's nothing like that.
You don't have to have metal detectors outside of schools.
You don't have to ban guns.
You don't have to ban trucks.
You don't have to scratch your head and wonder how we're gonna keep track of every weaponry or every potential piece of weaponry in an entire country in the event of terrorism.
It's so simple.
You just don't have Muslims in our countries.
It's that simple.
Not hard, right?
And I say this whenever there's a terrorist attack, whenever there's an attack by a Muslim.
There's two schools of thought.
There's two routes you can go.
There's one route which says we look at something like 9-11 and we think, how can we make it so that this can never happen again?
That we have to make our airports so secure that never Ever down to maybe 0.0001% certainty or uncertainty rather, we can prevent somebody from getting into the cockpit of an airplane and using it as a missile.
So that means we're gonna have air marshals and that means we're gonna change the way the plane is structured, change the way the planes are built.
And change up the seating, and we're going to have dogs, and we're going to have the TSA, and we're going to have x-ray scanners, and we're going to have advanced screening, and we're going to have all these other measures so that something like this can never happen again.
Or we look at the truck attacks.
How can we make it so that never in a million years could anybody for any reason get in a truck and drive through a crowd of people?
Well that's basically impossible.
But how are we going to regulate streets and traffic and so on?
And there's Muslims.
We have Muslims in the country, and we think like this.
Option B, the other school of thought, is you have no Muslims in the country.
Maybe you have no diversity in the country at all.
Maybe that's undoable in certain countries.
But in certain other countries, you might say, well, look, there's one group of people, or 1% of the population in America, and they're responsible for the most terrorist killings and the second most terrorist attacks.
And again, that's being as generous as you can to Muslims.
1% of the population, the most killings in terrorist attacks, and the second most attacks.
And that's if you buy all the FBI data about so-called white, politically motivated terror attacks, right?
So obviously there's one group of people that has this problem.
They're not happy.
You know, a second-generation Muslim or a first-generation Muslim who comes to a country and they say, you know what?
Yeah, McDonald's is great and, you know, this Europop is great, but I just want to do a suicide bombing, right?
I just want to go drive a truck through a crowd of people.
That's not a happy person.
So he's not happy.
We're not happy.
Let's just separate the two.
And then guess what?
No mosque shootings, no terrorist killings.
Why can that not be a solution?
Why can that not be proposed as a totally viable, simple, practical solution to these kinds of episodes of violence?
Why not?
Can anybody tell me?
Of course, nobody would ever propose that.
Because if any politician were to propose that, in Europe, for example, they would literally be put in jail.
In the United Kingdom, they're putting people in jail for this.
In New Zealand, there was an 18-year-old boy who shared the video of New Zealand shooting.
He's facing 14 years in jail because of it.
14 years.
He's 18 years old because he shared the video of it.
You know, and that's not even, that's not even talking about politics.
That's not even polemical.
That's just sharing, you know, a violent episode.
So you look at some of the politicians or some of the pundits who, people like Tommy Robinson, get thrown in jail for criticizing mass immigration.
In America, you couldn't propose that because you would get hit all day by the media.
That's insensitive, that's racist, that's bigoted, and so on.
Maybe that's the solution to all these problems, though.
You know, let's just, let's just take it as a hypothetical.
Oh, it's racist.
Maybe it is racist.
Maybe it is racist to say we shouldn't have Muslims in European countries.
Is that racist?
I guess it depends on your definition, but let's just say it is.
Would it perhaps be worth it?
Would it perhaps be practical?
Would it perhaps be pragmatic?
To have a policy that, yes, very well might be racist, but in the end saves thousands of lives, perhaps millions over the long span of history.
You know, if this kind of violence escalates, right?
Is it worth it?
It might be racist.
It might be racist in the sense that certainly there are Muslims who come to Western countries and they love Western countries.
I'm sure they're out there.
I'm sure there's some of them who they come to the Netherlands and their instinct is not to shoot people.
Their instinct is to come in there and maybe they really do want to assimilate.
They want to speak Dutch.
And they want to experience Dutch culture, and they just want to raise a family, and they just want to be nice, and maybe they're not even Muslim.
Maybe they're atheist or something like that, right?
And so certainly by implementing a policy of, we're not going to have Islam in Europe, people like that who are good, who want to set up shop in the Netherlands, they're going to be kicked out even though they did nothing wrong.
And so maybe that's a so-called racist component.
In that sense, it is prejudiced and discriminatory.
But if for every one person like that who gets kicked out, you prevent one terrorist attack, or maybe it's every ten people like that who you kick out, or every ten people like that who you prevent from coming into the country, you prevent one terrorist attack, you prevent one shooting, you prevent one bus attack, truck attack, explosion, whatever.
And some of these are horribly deadly.
In the case of Paris, it was 130 people killed.
So in some cases, it's wildly disproportionate.
Or for every 100 Muslims you don't bring in, you prevent one mosque shooting.
Or something like that.
Maybe you prevent civilizational war from breaking out in the country.
Muslims vs. Christians.
Whites vs. Arabs.
Something like that.
Is it worth it?
Might be racist, might be prejudiced, might be discriminatory.
Certainly there are going to be people who have never done anything wrong, never intended to do anything wrong, who will be adversely affected in their economic prospects.
But if you're saving lives, if you're saving the long-term stability of the country, I think it might be worth considering.
And maybe that's all that it is.
It's something worth considering, but you can't even talk about it.
The only solution to these problems is that, well, the people who oppose this, mass immigration, who oppose Islamic terror, they just have to be shut up.
They just have to be shut up.
We have to change the internet.
We have to censor the internet.
We have to change the laws.
There can be no more free political expression online or in the public space.
They'll have to be shut down or maybe put in jail.
And in addition to that, we're not even going to publish government figures.
We won't even publish government statistics on rape and on terrorism and on murder and on these other things because, well, that'll radicalize more people.
So we have to suppress that.
And every time a Muslim terrorist attack happens, well, we just have to silence that too.
We can't release the details.
If we do, it's days later.
And when we do, we're going to speculate.
Maybe it was an honor killing.
And in that case, it's not so bad.
And so on and so forth.
What kind of insane world are we living in?
What kind of clown world are we living in?
That's the only response that we can have whenever this kind of violence breaks out.
You know, there really are two camps.
I think it's people You know, I say this as somebody who's... I'm not a fan of mosque shootings.
I'm not a fan of Muslim terrorist attacks.
I don't like any of it.
I'm a normal guy.
I want to live in a city like New York maybe, or a city like Chicago, or a city like Los Angeles, and not have to worry about that.
I'm a normal guy who wants to travel to Europe and maybe go to Paris and maybe go to London on vacation as a tourist and not have to worry about getting hit by a truck or exploded with a nail bomb.
I'm a normal person.
I'm not a powerful person.
You know, I don't have private security.
The whole place doesn't get locked down when I go someplace.
I'm a normal person who's concerned about the safety.
The long-term viability of Western European countries.
And as somebody who has concern for those people, I'm saying, how are we gonna solve these problems?
Nobody else seems to be thinking like that.
Everybody else instead seems to be thinking, how can we force this square peg in a round hole?
How can we make it so that Muslims are going to be here and everyone's just going to have to deal with that?
Well, clearly nobody is concerned about ending all the violence.
Maybe they actually benefit off of it.
Because in the case of a shooting like this, or the mosque shooting, notice what is the immediate aftermath every time.
More gun control, more censorship, more federal police or soldiers in the streets.
Now that's different than local police.
Take a notice of who benefits from these kinds of things.
Take a look at the United Kingdom.
What happened after the truck attack on the bridge, right?
You remember this over the Charles River?
What was the first thing they did after that?
They deployed the military to the streets.
What's different about the military and the police?
The police are of the community.
You know, I live in a small town outside of Chicago.
And I know the police officers.
Everybody knows the police officers.
There's not a lot of crime committed, so if you get pulled over by the one Jagoff who gives everybody a ticket, you know his name, right?
And I'm saying that's one particular officer.
But, I mean, a lot of them are great people, and you know them, and they're a part of the community, and they do adopt a cop at the schools, and so on.
You know, we know them.
And so a police officer is going to have a very different rapport with the people in their town because they're our neighbors and they go to the same schools and so on.
That's not the case with the military.
And particularly with our military.
Our military really is not so representative of the country.
There are some disproportionalities going on there, right?
The military answers to the federal government or the central government.
The military in the United Kingdom doesn't answer to the people in this little community or this little neighborhood.
They answer to London.
They answer to whoever the powers that be, the real political power in the central government in London.
They answer to those people.
They don't answer to you.
And so you have to wonder, whenever these terrorist attacks happen, Nothing is done.
Nothing is done to have, again, a long-term workable solution, a sustainable solution to these problems.
Nothing is done.
And every time it happens, it's just more censorship, more gun control, more police on the streets, more government power, less accountability in government, and they keep bringing in the people doing these attacks.
You have to wonder, You have to wonder what's really going on there.
Do they want to stop the attacks?
Do they want to see the bloodshed end?
Do they want to have a country that's stable?
Do they want to have a country that is able to hold the government accountable?
Because what happens when a country is in anarchy?
What happens when a country is in conflict?
It's a lot easier to rule.
It's a lot easier to control a country like that when people are in a constant state of fear, when people are divided.
It's a lot easier to control a country like that if you're a banker, If you're a corporation, it's a lot easier to do business in a country like that with their politicians under those circumstances.
So we have to look at these politicians who have no children and they didn't come from the stock of the people.
They came from basically like a petri dish of bankers and donors and politicians and so on and that's in all these countries.
Where do these people come from?
People like Macron and Merkel and others.
So they're not of the people.
They don't have children, so they're not concerned with the long-term stability of the country.
Who are these people running all of our countries?
They continue to import the problem.
They continue to not address the problem.
Then whenever the problem presents itself, we ignore it, we expand our power, and we keep bringing the problem in.
You have to wonder, is that an accident?
Is that a coincidence?
I don't believe in coincidences.
So I look at that shooting today, And nobody's talking about it.
And we know why they're not talking about it.
And I just, you know, I really do... I really do pray for the future of the Western world because this stuff isn't getting better anytime soon.
It's going to get worse.
It's going to get a lot worse.
And we've already seen it's been getting worse.
Had anybody heard of this stuff 25 years ago?
You had a terrorist attack once in a while.
But had anybody seen the volume, the frequency of this stuff 25 years ago?
And it's not even the terrorist attacks.
It's killings.
It's rapes.
It's burglaries.
It's generally low social trust and violence.
Had anybody heard of this in Europe 25, 30 years ago when this immigration project started?
Of course not!
And then once in a while you get somebody who says, you know, I really don't like this and they do something stupid like the mosque shooting, something deranged and evil.
But, you know, somebody looks around and they say, I'm going to do something about it and then we're going to pretend like that's actually the root of the problem.
I don't think so.
I don't think so.
I think we all know what the root of the problem is.
So that's Utrecht.
We're gonna move right along here onto a little bit of a lighter note, but sort of along the same lines here.
This is something that happened on Fox News.
Like I said, normally I wouldn't talk about this, but this again just illustrates a broader point about what's happening in the media.
Fox News, a lot of people think, is their ally.
A lot of people watch Fox News, and Tucker Carlson, I think, is the exception there.
They'll watch somebody like Tucker and say, Okay, finally a media outlet I can trust.
Finally somebody who's gonna speak the straight truth to me, right?
You know, they look at even somebody like Hannity, and they say, well, I align with Hannity on a lot of issues.
He's conservative.
He might be a totally unrepentant shill and cheerleader for Israel, but that's okay.
He's generally conservative and supports the president.
Laura Ingraham, yes, she may have adopted children, but certainly she's still based in Redfield on certain issues.
Fox News is not your friend, and we learned this I think a long time ago, but when you see episodes like this weekend I think it gets exposed and put in pretty plain terms.
So this weekend, This is from CNN.
Judge Jeanine Pirro was suspended by Fox News after her widely criticized commentary doubting Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's patriotism according to a source familiar with the matter.
Last Saturday night, Pirro questioned whether Omar's Islamic religious beliefs stand in opposition to the U.S.
Constitution, prompting Fox to say, quote, we strongly condemn Jeanine Pirro's comments.
The network said at the time that the views Pirro expressed, quote, do not reflect those of the network, and we have addressed the matter with her directly, but declined to say if she was being sanctioned in any way.
So Judge Jeanine gets on television and again I'm this kind of stuff is really dated to me when people are talking about Sharia law and like Islam it makes sense for Europe and I guess that's why we're talking about it this week is because of a terror attack that happened in New Zealand and then what happened In the Netherlands.
But this is something that isn't really relevant to America.
So Judge Jeanine gets on and talks about America and talks about an American congresswoman and talks about, oh, she's wearing the hijab.
That goes against the U.S.
Constitution.
This stuff doesn't really resonate with me because the problems that I see facing the country have nothing to do with Islam, at least in America.
Has to do with mass immigration, has to do with foreign wars.
But anyway, this is besides the point.
Judge Jeanine makes, I think, a pretty fair point.
If Yohan Omar is wearing the hijab in Congress, well, I think you can see how that might be violating the U.S.
Constitution.
If she's being forced to wear that, or that's part of Sharia law, can we really say that her allegiance is totally to the Constitution of the United States?
We see that the Islamic tradition, the Sharia law, goes against the U.S. Constitution.
They contradict and Muslims see their religious law as higher.
They have a higher obligation to that than the American law.
Maybe that's less of a problem for a private citizen.
It's more of a problem for a congresswoman whose job it is to make the laws, right?
And I'm not really so into this idea of America as totally a social contract and totally, you know, the national identity of America is based 100% on the Constitution and this creedal identity, this civic, legalistic identity.
But nevertheless, it is important in America that we have this separation, at the very least from Islam, but from religion in general, that you shouldn't be governing by Islam.
Maybe you should be judging, or rather...
Should be legislating as a Christian, but definitely not as a Muslim.
So I think it's a pretty fair criticism.
I think, in short, that Judge Jeanine, when she says this religious garment violates the Constitution, it shows that she has allegiance to another legal code and so on, she probably shouldn't be wearing that or she shouldn't be serving in Congress.
I think that's a fair thing to say.
I think at the very least it's a reasonable thing to say.
You might not agree with it.
Maybe you say, well, actually, if you're a classical liberal, you say, oh, well, she can wear whatever she wants.
The country's supposed to have no content.
It's just supposed to be for Muslims and Jews and Christians and everybody can come and do whatever they want.
But, in any case, you could say that it's a reasonable, I think that's a fair argument to make.
Well, Fox News pulls the plug on her show.
Normally, I wouldn't say anything about that, but then they hired, today, Donna Brazile.
Which, if you remember, in 2016, Donna Brazile was the former head of the DNC, she was the former chairperson of the DNC, who was leaking debate questions to Hillary Clinton.
This was exposed by WikiLeaks, and this is old news, but it goes to show that she's a Democratic operative.
I mean, she hates the people in the country.
If she's gonna cheat the system and all the rest, So she gets exposed by WikiLeaks for leaking the presidential debate questions to Hillary Clinton.
She gets fired at the DNC.
She gets fired from CNN, even.
CNN says this is unacceptable, this makes us uncomfortable, this is unethical behavior, we can't have you on as a commentator.
Now Fox News is hiring her.
Now I don't really care about that.
I don't really care about Donna Brazile.
I don't really care about Judge Jeanine's show.
I don't really care about Ilhan Omar's hijab or anything like that.
But what does that tell us about the state of the media today?
About all these different media companies?
It says that they're not on your side.
They're not with us.
They're not our allies.
They might seem nice enough.
They might seem they're on our side.
They're conservative enough and everything else.
But at the end of the day, when they pull stuff like this, they're not.
So clearly we see that one weekend, Judge Chenine saying, you know, Muslims in our government, that's probably not okay.
Pulled the plug on our show.
Those are not our views and we condemn this.
This was insensitive and all the rest.
Can't have that.
But we can't have Donna Brazile, who's unrepentant, she's a hardcore liberal, she cheated the election and everything else.
Whose side is Fox News on?
And take a look at all their other pundits.
Tucker Carlson's maybe their only good one.
But take a look at some of the others.
Bret Baier.
Shep Smith, Henry Wallace, they're all liberals!
They're all liberals.
And this just says about the whole media apparatus that these people are all the same.
CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC.
You might think, well those are the bad ones.
And Fox News, you know, these are our guys.
CRTV, The Rebel, Breitbart, you know, The Daily Wire, these are our guys!
You know, look, I'm a Christian and they're Jewish.
I'm a Christian and they're for wars and for Israel and all this other stuff, but at the end of the day, they agree with me on abortion, and they agree with me on Donald Trump, and they agree with me on taxes.
These are our friends.
No, they're not.
No, they're not.
The people that run Fox News have no allegiance to the people.
The people who talk on Fox News have no allegiance to the people.
Where do you think they're broadcasting from?
Where do you think Tucker Carlson is broadcasting from?
I like Tucker Carlson.
But where is his show broadcast from?
Where are all these people's shows broadcast from?
New York City?
Washington D.C.?
Los Angeles?
They're not like us.
Did any one of these people come of just a normal upbringing?
No, they all went to Ivy League schools.
They all had a connection.
Look at Henry Wallace.
Was he one of these real pick-yourselves-up-by-the-bootstraps American Dream type stories?
Or was his father a major guy?
Was his father a major player?
And that's all these people.
That's all the contributors.
That's all the pundits.
That's all the owners.
And so the interests that they represent on these shows is, how could it be?
How could it be the interests of the people?
How could it be the interest of the nation?
How could it be the will of the people?
If none of them are the people, nobody in the entire apparatus, except for maybe the camera people, right?
Except for maybe the people cleaning the floors.
How could any of these people realistically be expected to represent the interests or the lifestyles of normal people?
They just simply cannot.
So I see something like that and it's like yeah okay it's Fox's you know boring legacy boomer media but still Tucker Carlson had the number one rated cable television show in all of news and he was like three million average viewership for the last month.
Crazy viewership.
So Fox is still very important in the right-wing ecosystem.
Our president watches Fox News.
Our president's live tweeting Fox News.
And so I think it just gives you an idea of the fact that what we're up against is not so much right-wing versus left-wing.
It's not so much, oh, it's Donald Trump and Charlie Kirk and Fox News and Marc Levin and CRTV and me against the left, but rather it's more like all us poor schmucks All us people who are hung out to dry who can't afford health care and you know property taxes are like $12,000 a year in some places.
It's all of us against all the rich people.
All the rich people, all the powerful people, this you know top 1% of the 1%.
I don't know is that something like 2% maybe it comes out to?
I don't think that math is right, but you know this top 2% of the population that kind of controls everything?
And I'm talking media, I'm talking bankers, I'm talking lobbyists.
This transnational group, they're post-American or they're beyond American.
Don't really have any roots to anywhere in the country, no allegiances to anybody in any community, any neighborhood, any little city.
And they might wax poetically about it, like George Will, about their love for baseball.
But George Will's an atheist with a gay son.
So who are these people, really, that are pulling all the strings?
Making tastes and making trends and everything else, telling us what to think.
That's not right-wing vs. left-wing.
It's all of us vs. all of them.
And that's the nature of the conflict.
And that kind of ties in with the shooting also.
That ties in with the Utrecht shooting also.
It's not, I don't believe anymore, a right-wing vs. left-wing thing.
I think it's these anti-human, transnational people that run the governments.
And that's not even the politicians even.
It's the people that actually run the governments.
If you believe that's the politicians, okay.
But I mean the people that really run the governments.
Who are they?
What are their names?
What do they believe?
Where do they live?
What is their motivation?
Why are they doing what they're doing to these countries?
They're not among us.
They might go on Fox News and all the rest, but they are not us.
So that's the media.
I know that's the Donna Brazile stuff.
I have to cringe at myself even talking about Donna Brazile in 2016.
I feel like anybody who still is talking about Hillary Clinton They're just automatically a baby boomer.
You know, they're probably over the age of 25 and they're automatically a baby boomer.
So I hear myself, Donna Brazile, the hijab, Sharia law, and I'm like, I'm getting like PTSD from 2015.
I'm like, oh, I'm hearing these truth revolt originals in my head.
It's Ben Shapiro, the myth of the tiny radical Muslim minority.
My brain is being fried, you know, so.
I'm going back to some of these talking points is a little bit uncomfortable for me.
My skin's crawling a little bit because it's not it's not fresh.
It's not edgy.
It's not yang, right?
But it is important to tell you it is important to deliver the message that they're they're basically not human and and that's not They're not who they think they are.
They're not who we think they are rather So anyway, we're gonna take a look at our super chats here and we'll see what you guys are saying about all this I wonder if there's going to be anybody, because I love this in the... I tweet about this this evening.
I say, why isn't anybody talking about the Utrecht shooting?
And you guys are the best.
I know that, you know, white people, right-wing people, they are high IQ.
They are the right side of the bell curve.
They are geniuses.
They're all geniuses.
Because everybody's commenting.
I say, why isn't anybody talking about the Utrecht shooting?
And people take that as though it was a sincere, earnest question.
I'm actually... What is the answer?
Hey you!
Can you tell me why... I don't know.
I don't know why they're not talking about your track.
Because all the comments are like, Don't be naive!
You know why they're doing it!
I don't know why you're asking us!
unidentified
Thanks.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Thank you so... Thank you so much!
So I hope we'll get some superchats that are like, Well, here's why they're not talking about it.
No, thank you.
Thank you for telling me.
Okay, but let's take a look at our Super Chats here.
We've got Cassie, Queen of Spades Dylan, who says, Oh yeah, that's great.
Maybe I'll take this one this time.
Maybe it's time for me to hop on board, get on the plane, head over to Israel.
And you know, that's the great thing about Israel.
Oh yeah, that's great.
Maybe I'll take this one this time.
Maybe it's time for me to hop on board, get on the plane, head over to Israel.
And you know, that's the great thing about Israel.
I have to say that's the cool thing about Israel, is that when Western Europe is on fire, when Australia and New Zealand are burnt to the ground, America and Canada are unrecognizable, the great thing is that Israel will remain the same, because they put in place policies to actually... because they put in place policies to actually...
Perpetuate the native population, the Jewish population, and they pass laws to protect the Jewish population.
So, when all is said and done, the Western world's gonna be on fire.
We can all, if they let us, go to Israel.
Or maybe not, because it's only for one group of people.
You know, that's kind of the rub there.
That's kind of the rub, because they are protecting their people, but it's only one group of people that gets to ever go there.
The right of return, they call it.
So that's kind of a trick.
You know, they've created this sanctuary, but it seems like it's only for one group.
You know, and maybe the other people get to go there.
I can't go there.
I'm not Jewish, but maybe the other people can go there.
I wish we had something like that.
Don't you wish there was just one place we could go to?
I guess Poland is like that.
I guess Hungary is starting to become like that.
But I just wish, you know, maybe our country could be like that in some ways, right?
Maybe there was some place in our country where it could be like that.
Nah, that's racist.
Nah, no, that's, that's...
No, that's offensive.
Sebbath says, Yo Nick, you want that CD key or what?
I can't sit through another boomer to your complaint of Windows 10 not being activated.
Just send me an email, douche.
Fixie says, Will you change the intro song?
I loved Wall before.
I don't know.
I might change the intro music.
Maybe I'll change it to Yang or something, you know, instead of it saying...
The lobby music.
Instead of the lobby music saying, well, maybe it'll say $1,000 or money.
There's not really a one-syllable word.
Maybe yang, I guess?
I don't know if that works as well.
But we're definitely gonna try and look for a new intro-like theme song, because it's Trump now.
We might have to change that.
We'll bring it back if Trump gets better, but we might have to swap it out in the meantime.
Syed says, the days of fasting and abstinence and Lent are not optional.
Okay, I'm just gonna ignore this.
Reformed Bugman says Owen Benjamin had two months of Super Chats and memberships refunded.
Be careful, big guy.
Keep that Yang hat on with the optics tight.
Get that money out.
Yeah, we are trying to go in for the Yang bucks.
Good thing I'm not flying off the handle every night like Owen Benjamin, right?
Because that would be rough.
I did see Owen Benjamin had his channel completely demonetized, which is brutal.
So, we're hoping that doesn't happen.
The good thing is, is that I'm totally uncontroversial.
Owen Benjamin, you know, I like Owen Benjamin, but he's a little out there these days.
And some of the stuff that he says, it's just not optical.
So, hey, knock on wood, right?
Good thing that I have all the right opinions.
Good thing I hold all the correct, inoffensive opinions.
I'm not hurting anybody.
I'm not offending anybody.
And if people are offended, it's ironic.
It's a comedy routine.
Relax.
It's jokes.
You know, like when I say things about, oh I don't know, white people being victims of racism, it's ironic.
Of course we know the only victims of racism are black people and every other group of people.
It's ironic.
It's the irony bro show.
I'm an irony bro.
I'm doing a bit.
I'm like Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert.
Like one of these funny Jewish people you see on television.
I'm just...
I'm a wacky caricature of a silly radical white guy, angry white guy who's just really sick of his country going to hell, you know?
It's all, it's all joke.
The people who watch this show, they're all liberals.
They all live in Manhattan.
They're all having sex with each other right now in some tiny shoebox apartment.
And that's the show.
So I'm glad I will not be demonetized because I am, I am a liberal.
I'm holding the right opinions.
I am doing, I'm on the right side of history here.
Let's see.
Max says, Hey Nick, you've provided me with so much entertainment and knowledge.
Have some British shekels.
God, British politics is insufferable and boring, but I watch your show as I feel the principles are mutual.
Much appreciated, big guy.
Glad you're enjoying.
Yeah, I don't really know so much about British politics.
It is so boring.
Every time... I check the BBC every day for news about the show.
I check a variety of sources and BBC is one of them.
And every week it's like something with Brexit, and it's just so dry.
You know, they're like, oh well, it's gonna be a clean Brexit, or it's gonna be a no-deal Brexit, and I don't even know what the parties are anymore.
What is there, Tories and Labour, and there's these other guys.
You know, I knew this stuff in high school when I was taking a class on comparative government, but...
Honestly, European politics is gay to me.
It's just kind of lame.
It's dry, it's boring, and it's totally paused.
So, yeah.
But you're right.
Maybe we are on the same wavelength.
Maybe you got to come to America, right?
America only says Spyro the Dragon did nothing wrong.
Yeah, everybody's getting on my case last week because I mispronounced it as Spiro the Dragon.
It's the Spyro the Dragon.
I haven't played that game in 15 years.
All right, give me a break.
People, oh, he's a Zoomer, he's never played.
I played Spyro maybe when I was like six or seven for a PlayStation 2, I think, or maybe GameCube.
I forget.
I mean, it was so long ago.
But people are always, it's always something, right?
You know, we do hour and a half, 90 minutes of content, and people are like, hey, but you remember when you mispronounced that game title?
Yeah.
Axton Hales is calling it now.
Beto O'Rourke will be the new Jeb Bush.
I don't know what you mean by that.
Here's the difference between Beto O'Rourke and Joe Biden.
I guess this is kind of a good question because this is kind of a good jumping off point.
Beto O'Rourke is a progressive.
So, you know, a lot of people made him out to be in 2018 when he was running for the Senate in Texas as the new Barack Obama.
This is what a lot of people said.
Same energy, similar vibe.
Charismatic, young, handsome speaker.
They compared him to Jack Kennedy or something.
But Barack Obama was relatively immoderate when he ran.
You know, if you remember the rhetoric which catapulted him into the spotlight in the beginning, which was his 2004 speech at the Democratic National Convention, he was relatively immoderate.
His speech was about how there's not a right-wing America and a left-wing America.
There's a United States of America.
Blah, blah, blah.
He was against gay marriage.
He was against all this stuff.
He was against the wars.
I mean, this was a relatively moderate position to have in 2008 in a lot of areas.
He won Indiana.
He won Ohio.
He won Iowa.
Okay, so this was not somebody like Hillary Clinton who was only capable of winning the coasts.
And this was at a time when, you know, this was before a lot of the demographic change was underway.
So, in the case of Beto O'Rourke, a lot of people had this perception that he was like other politicians, but he wasn't.
You know, even though there was this grassroots energy about him, he was for abolishing ICE.
He was for, I think, like private prison reform and was like radical criminal justice reform type stuff.
He wanted to destroy the border wall.
He wanted open borders.
So, you look at his actual policies, Medicare for All, a lot of that isn't necessarily mainstream.
He's basically a far-left progressive, and people forget that.
I don't think people realize that.
So, in that way, Jeb Bush was a hardcore establishment shill, obviously, you know, because of who his brother was, who his father was, and, you know.
Uh, so he, on the right wing, if you're trying to create an analogy between Jeb Bush and Beto, Jeb Bush was an establishment right winger.
You know, hardly a right winger at all.
Whereas Beto is a far left progressive.
And that, that might be an obstacle to him winning in 2020 if he gets a nomination, but I don't think he will.
So I don't know about that.
I think if by comparing him to Jeb Bush you mean that people think he has a much better chance than he does, then I think you're right.
In the sense that Jeb Bush was the frontrunner actually, before Trump announced he was by far and away the frontrunner because he had the name recognition.
And I remember even thinking at the time, oh yeah, Jeb Bush will just get the nomination and it'll be Bush and Clinton and that's terrible.
Uh, so I think in that sense, Beto O'Rourke will be somebody, I believe, who will flame out.
There's something wrong with him.
You know, when people have been pointing this out to me for a long time, and I tend to agree, you look at some of his speeches like that rally he did in El Paso, or was it in El Paso?
Whenever he did that rally to counter Trump's rally right after the State of the Union, He was not right.
I mean, there was something going on there.
There's something off about him.
And I'm not the first person to say that.
I don't know if it's drugs.
I don't know if it's... I don't know what it could be, but...
There's something off there.
And then there was that story today from Reuters that apparently, or I guess it came from Reuters ultimately, that Reuters had suppressed a story from 2018 where Beto O'Rourke admitted on the record that he has multiple felonies, not just the drunk driving one.
And he confirmed that that was true, but a Reuters reporter kept that withheld from the media and from the public until after the 2018 election to help Beto.
And so I imagine we're going to find out a lot more about Beto.
You know, that's the thing.
People sort of forget about politics, that it is, you know, it is largely about, you know, who you are as a person more than policy.
I think people really do forget that.
You look at somebody like Trump, certainly he won because he had great rhetoric and he had a great platform, but he also won because, I mean, him as a man, he was smart, he was witty, he had stamina, he had perseverance.
Nobody would have done, what was it, like five rallies in a day like he was doing in the build-up to the 2016 election in that last week.
I don't think anybody else was physically capable of that at that age.
You know, so you look at somebody like Beto and you might say, well he's got the look, he's got the charisma, he's got the platform, but does he have the stamina?
Can he make the race, you know?
Look at Marco Rubio as a perfect example of this.
I think Beto is actually a lot more like Marco Rubio in the sense that they've got this totally astroturfed, phony, like young, hip, fresh, ethnic kind of a vibe.
You know, they're both equally about his ethnic.
Marco Rubio probably more so.
Actually, he's more so because O'Rourke is Irish.
But, you know, Rubio, he had all this energy, big polling numbers, people were very excited, and then in the second debate, he shit the bed.
Remember the Rubot episode, where he, what was it, when he said that Barack Obama knows exactly what he's doing, he's fundamentally transforming the country, and blah blah, and he did that like five times?
And that was so embarrassing, and he never recovered from that.
The plan was, I'm gonna place 4th in Iowa, 3rd in New Hampshire, 2nd in South Carolina, and 1st in the primary after that.
Never happened for him.
Because in the second debate, he choked.
And so that just goes to show that you can have everything right, but if you don't have... if you can't execute, you know, if you're not the man for the job, it won't happen.
And I think in that regard, Beto's probably more similar to Rubio.
Eric writes, why are there Turks in the Netherlands?
Why are there mosques in Christchurch of all places?
Wow, really makes me do a big think.
Yeah, why is that a given?
Why is that a given?
Why is that a given that you have Turks in the Netherlands?
Why do Turks belong in the Netherlands?
Why does anybody except for the Dutch belong in the Netherlands?
Right?
I mean, you can have some immigration, certainly.
You can have a little bit of immigration, sure.
I mean, everyone's had a little bit of immigration forever.
But you have to understand the difference.
Immigration says, yeah, we're going to bring in some people.
Maybe it's tourism, maybe it's people studying, maybe it's notable people, scientists, artists, whatever.
Maybe have a small amount of immigration for workers.
That's immigration to me.
It's not transformative.
What's happening is not immigration.
Bringing in millions of people a year is not immigration.
I mean, that's population replacement.
That's saying all the people that are not being born because the fertility rate is going down is being compensated for by immigrants.
That's transformative.
That's called replacement.
You're literally saying, okay, if the Native American population is shrinking, we'll just make up the difference with immigrants Well, I think you could say, totally honestly, I mean, in the most logical way, the immigrants are replacing the Native people.
So I don't even see that as immigration.
I mean, yes, technically it's immigration that a person goes from here to another place.
But, like, an immigration program for a nation is, to me, it's supposed to be the exception, not the rule.
So, if you have, like, a few Turks in the Netherlands, I'd be like, okay.
But you've got, like, Muslim communities and ISIS people there.
They've got no business there.
Nobody has any business in the Netherlands except for the Dutch.
Maybe a few more, right?
And I think that's true basically in every country.
Except for Western countries.
Let's see.
ThoughtLine says get Vaporwave, Yanghat, and URL, securethebag.today.
Yeah, be sure to check that out.
ThoughtLine is the one who actually made the first Yang hat, so be sure to buy from them.
SecureTheBag.today.
I know the people who made the website, so it's totally legit, and they're donating all the proceeds to the campaign, so if you're into that, check it out.
DisplayName says, Nick, we are sick of your boomer tech and continuing issues.
When can you let me give you some free network and streaming infrastructure consulting?
Send me an email.
I love when people do the super chat saying that kind of stuff.
That's really considerate.
Cpb221 says, Nick, have you ever done a show without pants on?
No, I always have pants on when I do that.
I'm wearing jeans right now.
I've done the show in shorts before.
I used to do the show in shorts during the summers because it would get really hot and I'd just be like literally sweating on the show.
So I would do some shows in shorts, but I've never done the show with no pants on.
I might have done a stream with No Pants on before for Twitch, but I don't think I've ever done the show with No Pants.
You know, we have to bring a little bit of class to the show, right?
I never understood why Sean Hannity did his show in jeans, but now I get it.
There's, why is there, there's no point in like dressing up if nobody's gonna see it.
Doesn't make any sense.
So, um, yeah.
Kilo Toose is all knickers against liberals.
That's right.
That's, uh, that's a divide.
Heiman says, who are these rootless cosmopolitans?
Cape Verdeans.
Yeah.
Yeah, there's a certain group of people.
It's all these Cape Verdeans causing the problems.
I get the reference.
American Irony political action conference says it is increasingly obvious that we are in an ethnic Cold War and that it benefits globalist leaders at our expense.
Hey, is it getting hot in here?
Yeah, you think?
I mean, that's... That's what it is, right?
And people are going to start to understand this, I think, a little bit better once the changes start to take effect.
You know, a lot of people ask themselves, how can we make people start to feel what's happening in the country?
Nobody has to make them begin to feel it.
It's going to happen by itself.
Because all these people who are, you know, apolitical, they don't really care about what's happening.
They don't really care enough to look at the relevant facts or maybe the politically incorrect facts.
Well, soon their kids are going to go to a school and they're going to be in the minority, and then they'll understand very quickly what's going on.
So, I think it's only a matter of time before people start to wake up to the obvious, right?
El Campion says, Hey man, can you help me with my math homework?
No.
I haven't taken a math class in years, dude.
You know, because I didn't even take a math class my senior year of high school because I finished all the math classes my junior year, so...
It's been a while since I've done any high-level math, so probably not.
Cyrus says, Nick, debate progressive voice.
He's a high IQ zoomer.
Good show.
Progressive voice.
Let me check that out.
Let me pull it up here.
Whoops, that's progressive voices.
Oh, no, no, no.
Oh, no, no, no.
Is this LO Yikes Department?
Okay, well this one doesn't have him on there.
Oh, never mind.
I think I was looking at a different guy.
Is this?
No, this isn't progressive voice, is it?
I don't know.
I'll look it up after the show.
I'm not going to find it right here.
Pedro's thoughts on the rise of the Mexican mestizo ethnostate?
I don't know anything about that.
Yeah, that's great.
Yeah, that's great.
It is true, I think, that Cassie Dillon's converting to Judaism.
But I don't know.
I mean, I don't know why anybody would do that.
Anybody who's a Christian who does that is just slapping God in the face.
Because Jewish people discourage you from becoming Jewish, and when you do that, effectively what you're doing, like, what's the difference between a Christian and a Jew?
You're saying, I reject Christ now.
I mean, that's all that is.
When you go from Christian to Jew, you're saying, I did believe that Christ was the Son of God, and now I don't.
I reject Christ now.
So, you're basically guaranteeing your spot in hell.
You're saying, okay, one please.
I'll take one for hell.
I'll reserve my seat now.
As you remember, even the most liberal qualifications for salvation, the most Protestant, the most heretical, the most liberal say, at the bare minimum, you gotta believe that Christ is the Son of God.
So if you say, yeah, I thought that was the case, but now I don't, now I'm Jewish, well, I don't know, man, I don't know why anybody would do that, but okay.
Westward says, do you ever do your show with pants on?
Yeah, every night.
Yeah, I can relate.
It says, man, all of these bad teeth and silly accent, knickers, town bout, clean Brexit and hard Brexit, shee, it all's I want is a pog and my goddamn Yang bucks, hashtag bag.
Yeah, I can relate.
I can relate to that, my brother.
That's the unfortunate thing for all these Europores.
They're not going to get any Yang bucks.
I guess they already get Yang bucks because they have free everything over there.
They don't have mass migration to the same extent that we do.
I guess they're already doing fine.
Bill the Butcher says, yeah, Rubio and Beto are similar in that they are both massive faggots.
Yeah, that's true.
Also true.
America Only says Candace Owens and Ben Shapiro are too radicalized.
I agree.
Can't have them.
Can't have Candace Owens anywhere near this show, alright?
This is a moderate campus conservative show as an Afro-Latino campus conservative.
I reject The identity politics, the Islamophobia of Candace Owens and Ben Shapiro.
These people are too out there.
You know, Ben Shapiro talking about bulldozing Palestinian homes and raw sewage and all this other stuff.
I just think everybody should live in peace and harmony, you know?
So, they're a little too radical for me.
Cloudstar says, uh, dividend and conquer $1,000 nationalism now.
Yeah, forget divide and conquer.
We are about the dividend now.
We are people of the dividend.
What's a Wignatz is who would win a game of 4D chess?
Yang or Blumpf?
Yang!
Of course, Yang.
Because, you know, of course the Chinese.
I think, didn't they invent chess?
I don't know if that's true or not.
unidentified
Did they?
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
In any case, I think they're better at it.
No, I guess it came from India.
Well, it came from Asia, so... Yang has a predisposition to succeed in chess, and Blumpf is a poker player, right?
I guess that's the old...
That's the old analogy about Americans and Russians, but it's true.
Blumpf doesn't have a high enough IQ.
He's too busy eating Big Macs and, you know, talking about Big League this and all the rest.
Yang is a high IQ East Asian.
He, if anybody could play four-dimensional chess, it's Andrew Yang.
You know, I'm sure he's got a mind like a computer.
And Capital says, have some Dutch euro shekels.
Thank you, my European brother.
Bone Lord says, Nick, the world is increasingly a more horrid place, but with that winning smile and your handsome good takes on the subject of the matter, I think we will prevail.
Hey, thanks, man.
I appreciate that.
It's true.
It's true.
Ultimately true.
We are gonna make it if that's the case.
God's Plan says, the field when Pewds is the new Ozzy Osbourne.
unidentified
I don't know how you got that, but...
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Okay.
I don't know.
Is that a meme?
I've never heard that one before.
But anyway, it looks like those are all our Super Chats.
So I think that's gonna do it for us tonight on the show.
Remember to check us out at nicholasjfwentus.com slash membership.
If you want to support the show, you want to keep the show going, it's only $5 a month and that's the best way to support us.
You also get one premium show every week exclusive to only premium members on Sunday.
So be sure to check that out.
The link is down below.
NicholasJFuentes.com slash membership.
Remember to subscribe to the channel.
Give me a big thumbs up.
Leave a comment below.
Click the notification bell to get notified every time I go live.
We're on the air Monday through Friday, 7 p.m.
Central, 8 p.m.
Eastern Standard Time.
I'm Nicholas J. Fuentes.
As always, thank you guys for watching.
Thanks to our Super Chatters premium members.
Everybody who watches the show, we love you folks.
And we will see you tomorrow.
Until then, have a great rest of your evening.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼
Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.
unidentified
It's going to be only America first.
America first.
The American people will come first once again.
America First!
▲
Export Selection