All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 19, 2023 - America First - Nicholas J. Fuentes
01:34:39
RUSSELL BRAND #ME TOO??? ACCUSED OF RAPE By Four Women In UK Press | America First Ep. 1219RUSSELL BRAND #ME TOO??? ACCUSED OF RAPE By Four Women In UK Press | America First Ep. 1219
Participants
Main voices
n
nick fuentes
01:26:43
Appearances
Clips
a
alex jones
00:20
| Copy link to current segment

Speaker Time Text
unidentified
E-girls.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Who's got the clip?
No e-girls.
Never!
Hashtag never e-girls.
Not even once.
unidentified
Guy, I've never heard of him.
What is just that?
Americanism, not globalism. not globalism.
Will be our freedom. Will be our freedom.
Will be our freedom. Will be our freedom. Will be our freedom.
Guy, I've never heard of Nick Quartz.
Who's that?
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 today forward, it's going to be only America first.
America.
alex jones ▲ ● ▼
America first. America first. America first. America
unidentified
first. America
first. America first. America first. America first. America first. America first. America first.
America first.
Thank you.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
America First 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 here with you tonight on Monday.
We have a lot to talk about tonight.
Lots to get into.
A big show.
And we're back at our normal time tonight.
Gonna try and keep on schedule this week.
But we have a big show, our featured story tonight we're going to be talking all about Russell Brand and the major Me Too allegations against him.
He's been accused of total hardcore rape by four women, one of them even 16 years old.
At the time of the allegation, which is so outrageous.
When I heard that, I just couldn't believe it.
I said, what a disgusting animal.
Lock this guy up.
That is literally a child and cannot be condoned under any circumstance.
That alone is enough for me.
I've seen enough.
Lock him up.
We'll talk about all that.
We'll get into the details.
Horror story.
In every single case, every one of the victims, it's just one nightmare after the other and reprehensible actions.
So, we'll talk about that.
Kind of unbelievable.
And, you know, I feel like we've never really talked about Russell Brand on the show.
Honestly, I'm just not interested in him because he doesn't talk about Jews, quite frankly.
And I'm just...
So sick of, I have no patience or tolerance or interest in these truth-tellers, conspiracy theorists, and they're obviously backed by big money.
You know, you get a guy like this and what's the big appeal?
If you don't know, you know he's an actor but he's rebranded himself lately as like this, I don't know, this like hippie conspiracy theorist, like a more hippie Alex Jones.
But whenever you see these guys, they're just talking about, like, the Illuminati.
And to me, that defeats the whole purpose.
If you're gonna be out there, be out there!
Be a Nazi, you know, or whatever, or whatever.
Be something else.
Talk about Israel.
Talk about Jewish power.
Talk about race.
Or something but you get all these people and they're really into it because it's amusing to them.
I think they For some of them they just find it amusing Because it's really not that deep.
So I've never really been too interested in his content And I've never really had any interactions with him.
Although he's sort of now in this space.
But now he's being accused of this rape stuff.
So we'll get into all that.
That'll be our featured story.
We'll also be talking tonight about Illinois.
Big problems.
Today, a new law has gone into effect which eliminates cash bail.
And this has already been experimented with in Cook County where they've mitigated the cash bail.
They've made it more rare than it used to be.
But now in the entire state of Illinois, there is no cash bail.
Which means that when someone is arrested and charged with a crime, most people just get turned loose automatically.
Someone that commits a murder in the second degree doesn't go to jail.
And when I say jail, I mean they don't have any kind of pre-trial detention.
They get arrested, and then they get released.
And they say, come back for your trial when we're going to try you for murder.
unidentified
That's how it works.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Nobody will have to pay money in order to be released.
That system is over.
And the only people that are going to be held in detention So basically it's a giant prison break.
So we'll talk about all that as well.
Like I said, it goes into effect today.
And even then, the burden of proof is on the state to prove that those people must be detained.
So basically, it's a giant prison break.
So we'll talk about all that as well.
Like I said, it goes into effect today.
Let's see how this goes.
Chicago's bad enough, but it could get worse.
So we'll talk about that too.
Should be a pretty good show.
Before we get into it, I want to remind you to smash the follow button here on Cozy to get a push notification whenever I go live.
And follow me on Rumble.
I'm live every night on both Cozy and Rumble.
Make sure you're following me on both.
Have to follow on both and follow me on Rumble because all the replays are there.
All the replays for the whole year are all on Rumble.
And it seems like that's a more popular option for replays these days.
I've been getting a lot of replay traffic so check it out if you haven't already.
And follow me on Telegram, link is down below, t.me slash NickJFuentes to get updates about the show.
And with that, I think that's everything.
That's all of our announcements.
And I don't really have anything else to discuss.
Last week I just kind of went a little crazy.
I feel like every show I did last week was about Oliver Anthony.
But I'm trying to get that under control a little bit.
I've been a little bit obsessed with my nemesis, my eternal enemy.
And so I think I did three shows.
They weren't even supposed to be about that.
It wasn't even in my notes.
But every night I found myself going to battle again against him.
So I don't really have anything like that for you tonight.
Other than to say I had another episode where I went to a restaurant And there was a white person playing music in public.
This has just got to stop.
I'm not going to do a whole monologue about it again like I did last week, but last week I talked about I went to Starbucks to get coffee, I sat outside, and there was some hillbilly blasting country music from a portable speaker.
And I said, I thought only black people do that, and I guess I realized that Our problem in America isn't just blacks.
It's also a lot of white people too.
So that was the day that I really became a true reactionary, I guess.
Like a true racist elitist.
Because I said it's not just black people blasting the music.
It's also a lot of inconsiderate white people as well.
It sort of shocked me to my core.
It rocked my world.
And I realize the problem is really like poor people or something.
And then I had the same experience again this weekend.
I went out again to get coffee, not at Starbucks, at some other place.
And I go, and this was indoors!
I go, I get my coffee, I get a muffin, I sit down, and I'm thinking, I'm gonna enjoy a quick breakfast, a little muffin, coffee, I was having a great day, the weather was nice, fall, overcast, cool day, and I'm gonna sit down and read through my Telegram saved files and things, all the news for the week, you know.
And there's this boomer next to me with an iPad and he's blasting like me TV radio.
So it's Tom Jones and it's all the 70s classics.
And so I'm just losing it.
It's not even just a racial thing anymore.
It's just people.
People gotta get a grip, man.
Everybody... It's not just... It's not just N-words.
You know, people have this expression, they say, Black people have gone insane.
Everybody's gone insane.
Maybe I was wrong.
Maybe I was wrong to be so racist before.
I wasn't racist enough against my own people or just white people.
Some say I'm not white.
So anyway, so I don't have a huge monologue other than to say this is like epidemic proportions.
I'm the only one Speaking out about this.
And I've been getting a lot of criticism.
A lot of people have been watching my show and they've been saying, Fuck you, Nick.
You're anti-white.
You hate poor people.
You're so privileged and this and that.
Which is just noise to me.
But there has been far more people, like 10 to 1, have reached out to thank me.
And they email me and they text me and some of them are my closest friends and they say, you know what?
This is why I follow you.
They say thank you for speaking out about this.
No one has the balls anymore to hate fat people, ugly people, poor people.
Forget about just black people.
It's easy to hate black people.
It's easy to hate women or millennials.
Who these days has the balls to go out and say, you know what?
I do fucking hate poor people and I don't want to be around ugly people and all these other categories.
Nobody else will say it.
This is what people say to me.
That's not me saying this.
Before you judge, that's not me saying this.
I get thousands of emails from people and they say, thank you, you're the only one brave enough to say this.
And I agree and I respond and I say, you're right.
I said, what happened to being right-wing?
All these right-wingers are a bunch of liberals.
When did they all get so inclusive?
They want to say, oh the left With their diversity and their tolerance and their inclusivity.
But then they'll go and every time they have to pander.
They pander and appease and they tell ugly people and fat people and poor people what they want to hear and that they belong and all this.
And I'm over here saying, where'd all the conservatives go, huh?
Where'd all the right-wingers go?
I thought we were the party of exclusion, not inclusion.
The only group that conservatives want to exclude is like, uh, tranny pedophile rapists.
That's it.
But they're like, regular trannies?
Come on in.
Regular gay people?
Come on in.
We don't want the gay people that molest too hard.
Just the moderate gay molesters can come on in to the Mug Club and Infowars and Fox News and all the rest of it.
Forget, and that's even, forget about blacks.
Forget about, for a second, ugly people.
Forget about poor people.
Like, they don't exclude anybody.
I miss the good old days when it was just such a small, small group.
It was like rich, good-looking white men and no one else.
Now it's like, oh bring on the women and bring on all the minorities and bring on Jews and Muslims and gays and trannies and, you know, bring them all on just as long as they're not freaking Democrats.
As long as they didn't vote for Joe Biden.
Even if they did.
Even if you're Dave Rubin.
unidentified
Come on in.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
So, like I said, I'm not gonna do a whole monologue about that again.
I'm just reminding you that that's not what I'm gonna do tonight, but... That's just a little... just a little, uh...
Evaluation of where we're at on the show.
A lot of that, I'm kidding, okay?
Obviously a lot of that, you know, is just tongue-in-cheek and I'm just being playful.
You know that.
I love everybody.
I'm a Christian.
I love everybody.
Some of my closest friends are fat, okay?
Some of my closest friends are poor and I make fun of them for it all the time.
So I do love everybody and I am kidding to some extent.
But I also am being completely serious to a large extent.
We do have to kind of get a grip and say, okay, but we don't really want to encourage any of that.
We don't want to encourage people to be poor, ugly, fat, or black.
I'm just putting that out there.
Anyway, so that's that.
We're not going to talk about that tonight.
I want to move on.
I want to get into the news.
But I just want you to know, I hear you.
I'm your voice.
If you're one of those people out there these days that says, where's somebody that's really gonna stick it to them?
I'm here.
Okay, that's why I wake up every day and do this.
Because I watch Alex Jones and I say he's not going far enough.
I wake up every day and I spew this ideological hatred because I tune in to Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones and I say they don't hate the poor.
They don't hate women.
They don't hate They don't hate ugly people and, you know, where are we getting that message anymore?
Anyway, so that's that.
Nah, a little bit kidding, but I want to move on.
I want to get into the news and our first story is about this cashless bail here in Illinois.
I think we covered this at one point over the last year, but this is a law that went into effect in the state last year.
It didn't go into effect.
It was passed last year in the Illinois state legislature.
And they said that to ask a defendant to put up money for bail is victimizing, somehow, blacks and Hispanics.
They said it's racist.
And it constitutes a war against the poor.
So for those that don't know, this is the system.
People get arrested.
They're brought to prison.
They're booked.
They're detained.
And then, depending on the severity of the crime, they have to put up money in order to leave.
And the amount of money is determined by a number of factors, and it varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but it's the severity of the crime, whether or not they pose a risk of fleeing, or how dangerous they are, if they're likely to commit more crimes if released, all sorts of things.
And so they put up the money, and the idea is that that is an incentive for them to return to face a trial.
You get arrested, you get booked, they detain you, you give them a lot of money, and then they release you.
And the idea is that to ask for a criminal to come back, well, who is going to show up willingly to jail, or rather to a trial, to be put in prison?
If it's likely, they'll go to prison.
Probably not many.
So the idea is that if they have to put money in, they'll come back to get their money.
Well, they did away with that.
That is now gone.
Nobody has to put up a cash bail anymore in the entire state of Illinois because they said that that is a war against the poor.
They said it's criminalizing poverty.
That they've made it a crime to be poor by requiring somebody who is charged with a crime already to put up cash bail.
So that's done.
And then another part of the law says that most criminals will automatically be turned loose or not even brought to jail in the first place.
So a criminal that just commits a misdemeanor crime will never even be brought to jail.
They'll just be given a citation and they go on their way.
Or if it's even more severe, if they are brought to jail, they'll be released after they go to jail.
And it's only going to be a select number of felonies Where a person will forcibly, they call it a forcible felony, where they will be subject to a pre-trial hearing where it will be determined by a judge if they should be detained.
So it's this big package deal where basically nobody's going to jail anymore.
They're kind of just getting rid of that.
So this is a story.
This is from NBC Chicago.
It says, quote, Two months after the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the Pretrial Fairness Act contained within the larger Safety Act was constitutional, the elimination of cash bail is set to become the law of the land in the state.
The elimination of cash bail will go into effect on Monday, which is today.
And judicial systems in all 102 of the state's counties are preparing for that system to go into place.
The law faced plenty of scrutiny, with dozens of state's attorneys filing suit against it.
Their appeals were heard by the state Supreme Court, who ruled that the law would stand in July.
Under provisions of the bill, the state will allow judges to determine whether individuals accused of a specific set of felonies and violent misdemeanors pose risk to another individual or the community at large.
Judges will also be asked to determine whether the defendant poses a flight risk if released according to the text of the bill.
So-called forcible felonies include first and second degree murder, predatory criminal sexual assault, robbery, burglary, residential burglary, aggravated arson, kidnapping, aggravated battery resulting in great bodily harm, or any other felony that involves the use or threat of physical violence.
Anyone committing traffic violations, Class B and C misdemeanors, petty business offenses, or local ordinance violators will be cited and released.
As officers interact with people suspected of the lower-level offenses, if the person has proper identification, doesn't pose a threat, and doesn't have an obvious medical or mental health issue, then an officer should issue a citation, according to the Pretrial Fairness Act.
So, people are not going to jail anymore and they don't have to pay bail.
And it went into effect today and we actually have the first person who is affected by the law.
This is according to CWB Chicago.
It says a woman accused of pepper spraying four Chicago cops during Mexican Independence Day festivities in the loop this weekend became the first person in the city to have a new felony criminal case handled under the state's new no cash bail law.
Esmeralda Aguilar of Cicero was released from custody after appearing before Judge Mary Murubio at the Leighton Criminal Courthouse on Monday afternoon.
Prosecutors did not ask for her to be held in the county jail.
She intentionally discharged pepper spray toward a group of Chicago cops in the 200 block of North Wabash around 2.38 a.m. on Sunday.
The incident was captured on police body cameras and resulted in two officers being treated at Northwestern Memorial Hospital.
She is charged with four counts of aggravated battery of a peace officer.
But she is now free.
So she didn't have to put up money.
There's no bail.
And the prosecutors didn't even ask for her to be held in detention pre-trial.
So she went and pepper sprayed four cops.
She assaulted four cops.
Two of them were sent to the hospital.
And they jailed her, and then they released her, and now they're just asking her to come back.
Then they just say, hey, come back and face a trial where you will likely go to prison, and we hope to see you there.
Hey, we really hope you do the right thing and come back, because there's no money involved, and the judge hasn't required her to be detained.
So that's a new law.
And people wonder why things are the way they are in these cities.
It's kind of amazing.
I don't understand.
I mean, I do understand, of course, but what I mean to say is it's completely illogical, as we know.
We have this new mayor in Chicago who got elected on this program where he says that the real cause of crime, he says it's these root causes that must be addressed.
And this is what you hear from all of the liberals, left-wing types, black activists.
They say the reason that everybody's out there committing these crimes in major cities is because, well, they just aren't being given opportunities.
It's the system that's creating this.
It's society that's creating this.
The reason people go out And murder and steal and kill and riot and do these things is because they don't have education.
The city didn't provide that for them.
They don't have jobs.
There are no jobs.
So when they don't have jobs, they have to resort to pepper spraying police officers at 3 a.m.
celebrating Mexican Independence Day.
They have to do that!
What do you expect them to do?
It's not like there's jobs or free education or something.
So the story goes.
But then you see the kind of policies you have with the cops where they say, uh, we're not gonna charge anybody, we won't arrest anybody, we can't chase criminals, and if we do chase them, and arrest them, and charge them, then we can't even put them in jail, and we can't expect them to pay cash, and we're just going to politely request that they come back for a trial,
You know, it's like it's no wonder every one of the major cities is having the most rapid expansion of violent crime since they began keeping records.
And I've said this on the show for years, every problem that we have in the country can be solved overnight.
We have the means to do it.
It's just that in literally every case, we're just choosing not to.
This is a perfect example.
You know how you get criminals in jail?
In strictly methodological process, is you need cash bail.
You need them to put money up so that you can ask them to return.
They're already criminals.
They're in the system.
They're pending trial because they committed crimes.
They broke the law.
And the city, the system, is counting on them, or rather the entire state, Is counting on lawbreakers, people that break laws, criminals, to not further break laws and voluntarily, willingly surrender to a court for a future trial?
Obviously this just doesn't make any sense.
And how would we put any criminals in jail if we can't even get them to show up for a trial?
How are you going to get even the people that do wind up in prison, even the criminals that do wind up where they belong, which is in prison, how do you even get them there if you can't even get them to show up to the trial?
But that's really the point.
That's the whole point is they don't want them to show up to trial.
Because the whole liberal belief is that basically nobody should be in jail.
This is really like a soft decriminalization of all criminal offenses.
That's really what's going on here.
They couldn't get laws, they couldn't like for example get the police disbanded, and they couldn't get certain laws relaxed or massaged around certain things.
Like, fundamentally, liberals think that very few things should be punishable by jail time.
And even then, they think it should be not severe.
Like, in other words, if liberals had it their way, the only thing that would be a jailable offense would be like a hate crime, drawing a swastika on a Jewish cemetery or school, posting hate speech on the Internet, that sort of thing.
Maybe like murder, rape, which, you know, they have a very expansive definition.
Everything else, I'm a firm believer they don't even think should be against the law.
They don't even think there should be laws about that.
Because they're fine with basically everything else.
They're fine with, like, vandalism, arson, graffiti.
They're fine with certain assaults.
Like, assaulting cops?
They don't like cops.
Assaulting white people?
They don't like white people.
Burglary?
They say that's justified.
They say that's like Robin Hood.
And you see this all the time, like you'll have a black person shoplifting at a Walmart, and no matter what the story is, I see it on social media all the time, you'll have liberals jump in the replies and say, oh well, that person was probably poor trying to feed their kids.
And they don't even know what's going on!
There was some viral video this week where a woman was shoplifting $1,000 worth of meat from a grocery store.
And people said, obviously this is just straight up theft and this person should be thrown in jail.
And people in the replies are saying, no, no, they, she needed that food.
We shouldn't judge.
She needed that to feed her family.
So when you really sit back and think, it's like they don't even believe that most criminal activity should be a crime or should be, and therefore punished by laws or with real consequences.
And so, I'm starting to suspect that these types of things, conservatives when they see it, lose their minds and say, this is outrageous, this is totally contrary to common sense, of course you're going to get more crime, and by making it so difficult for criminals to be put behind bars, cops are not doing their jobs or they're retiring.
And then you start to realize that that's what they want.
This is a backdoor way to disband the police and it's a backdoor way to decriminalize most crimes.
To decriminalize most statutes regarding most criminal activity as we understand it today.
That's really what this is about.
Because they know that if one of us steps out of line And does something that they don't like, like for example January 6th, or like this Russell Brand story we're about to talk about.
If there's a male who sexually assaults a woman, or if somebody's misgendered, or if there's an anti-semitic flyer, they know that those people will go to jail.
And by the way, they know that because now the media and politics has become part of the criminal justice system, where if a viral video blows up on Twitter or Facebook or TikTok or something, that person is certainly going to jail.
You know, a Kyle Rittenhouse, a Derek Chauvin, a January 6 rioter, a so-called crooked cop, or a Russell Brand, a rapist.
If somebody goes viral for something that is not popular That's where the media and politics enters the criminal justice system and those people with certainty are going to get what the court of public opinion deems the appropriate punishment.
They're going to get locked away and the key gets thrown out.
Everything else, the day-to-day stuff, of course, that is not favored by the media, that is not politically what they want, that's the stuff where the cops are going to back off.
That's the stuff where the people committing those types of crimes are not going to get charged by the state.
They're going to be released from jail.
They're going to be able to skirt court and not be held accountable or punished for it.
And so they're really just In a way that we would think is not common sense, it's really just an indirect way of achieving a lawless society.
And that's where I feel like conservatives have to get comfortable with the idea that, like, yeah, we kind of are fascists in that sense.
You know, because I was thinking about this the other week.
I see this stuff all the time on social media where liberals put out this absolute trash, you know, these memes and stuff on TikTok or Twitter where they talk about, the only good fascist is a dead fascist, kill fascists, that's how I like my fascists, dead!
You know, they say that kind of stuff.
And then you realize that like, yeah, like we are, like we basically are fascists.
To them, and in general.
Because they, on some level, believe that if you want to have a sane, orderly, cohesive society, in other words, if you want to have rules and have them be enforced, and they're like universal and objective, then you're, in their mind, a fascist.
Because when I see that kind of stuff, I sit back and I'm like, Where's all this animosity for fascism?
I don't know why they hate fascism so much.
Like, what's the problem?
I would understand why they would hate, like, Nazis in particular, because there's this whole Holocaust lie and everything like that.
And they're talking about anti-semitism and like killing Jews or killing retards or killing gay people or killing large parts of the population for eugenics purposes.
I don't understand why people would say we shouldn't have those people running the government.
Again, based on the popular misconception of all that stuff.
But when they say, well, the only good fascist is a dead fascist, it's like people don't feel that strongly about communism.
People don't feel that strongly about Sharia law.
They don't feel that strongly about other stuff.
So what's the problem?
And then you realize what fascism represents is like Everything that America was, basically, to them, and I think objectively as well, that that is what America represented, was order, rules, traditions, hierarchy, classes, all these things that are now being gotten rid of.
And that's why I say conservatives have to get a lot more comfortable just asserting a completely alternative view, which is like, yes, I want to see the military on the streets.
And I got all this crap the other week.
I did this bit where I said, what if China invaded New York and they put their soldiers on every corner?
And if there were criminals, they just started executing them on the street.
And everybody freaked out, and even conservatives said, oh, I think this guy's here just to make the right look bad.
I think Nick Fuentes is only saying crazy stuff like this to make conservatives look bad.
And it's like, what?
That's what conservatives should want!
What do you think the answer is to this stuff?
And I see conservatives all the time, and we're gonna get into it with Russell Brand.
It's guys like him and others.
It's like very in vogue these days to say that the left is, they're the real fascists.
They're the real Nazis.
The Nazis and the Communists had a baby and it's the Democratic Party.
You see this kind of stuff all the time.
And it's like, hang on a minute.
To the extent that China is fascist, that is how much I want to emulate them.
And if the 1994 crime bill that Joe Biden passed is racist and fascist, well we like that.
That was a good bill.
It did create mass incarceration and that made America safe.
Like, and if I go out there and say that I want soldiers on the streets of cities that are clearly out of control and that makes me a fascist, that means I'm trying to make the right look bad?
It's like, what makes the right look good?
Letting this continue?
This is what needs to be done.
Every major city is being devoured by crime and it's creating this huge economic disaster Because, especially after the pandemic, what businesses are going to want to invest in these cities?
Commercial real estate was already annihilated by the pandemic.
And now there's this crime surge going on everywhere.
Who is going to hold up these cities?
Who is going to?
Because the cities depend on that.
They're all bankrupt.
And yet they depend on that tax revenue to remain as solvent as they are, which is barely at all.
You know, Chicago, New York, LA, all these cities are in the red.
So they need that investment and they need rich people paying these taxes and so on.
And so it's this huge economic problem.
Of course, it's obviously a public safety problem.
It's also just embarrassing as a society.
You see these stories about tourists come into San Francisco, they go to the beach for five minutes, and a criminal breaks into the back of their car, steals all their suitcases, and rides away in 30 seconds.
And they can't get help at all.
It's just over for them.
And it's like there's one way to solve it.
Which is to say, we want the opposite of what the left wants.
Not disband the police, double the size of the police.
Not demilitarize the police, replace the police with the military.
Not, you know, community policing and therapists.
You need police in riot gear and assault rifles and tanks and armored personnel carriers rolling down the streets of the most dangerous neighborhoods.
You need that.
That's the only way to solve it.
How else could you do it?
And they'll call you a fascist and they'll be kicking and screaming the whole way, but what kind of a society do we want to live in?
A compromise with the left on this issue is literally deadly.
Literally.
Think about what we're compromising with here.
With animals.
Opportunistic Barbaric savages that go out and in some cases kill for fun or for profit.
And they're the ones that are winning from all this.
But again, the left sees no problem with it because they see the criminal population which is largely, it is a racial issue.
They see that the criminal population represents the black and brown underclass of America.
It's not whites and Asians in these cities that are committing these crimes.
It's not to say that there are no whites and Asians that commit crimes, but violent crime and the source of this surge that's happening in the country, it all goes together.
Poverty, criminality, and black and brown.
And the way that the left sees it is that this is a just desserts against a racist society.
This scourge of crime is like a righteous retribution.
It's like a righteous, compensatory trend where they're willing to tolerate vandalism, property destruction, shoplifting, in some cases even murder.
Because somewhere in the liberal consciousness, this is like a payback.
It's like a retributive, compensatory thing where they're getting theirs.
And like deep down, although a lot of them won't admit it, they're like happy that the rich and that whites are getting killed, are getting robbed, are getting their cars stolen from and all this.
Because they look at the colors stolen from and all this.
Because they look at the color.
They identify with the criminals based on skin color.
This mayor and the previous mayor look at the criminals, like Obama looked at Trayvon Martin, and say, if I had a kid, he'd look like my kid.
And they say these are people that they're the victims.
The criminals are the victims.
And the white racists that are being the victims, it's like, hey, well serves you right.
You didn't give them jobs, and you didn't give them education, and you were racist, and you did redlining, and now you want to throw our 17-year-olds in jail?
You're the problem.
So we can tolerate crime while we take your money and use it to fund education and we level the playing field.
That's how they see it.
And that's what these policies are about.
And that's fucked up.
That's just wrong.
That is sick.
And it's insane.
And it's just plain wrong.
And it's wrong objectively because a crime is a crime.
It doesn't matter if there's a good reason behind it.
It's stealing.
It's murder.
It's whatever it is.
So we don't believe in that kind of relativistic thinking.
That's one.
But two, it's just plain wrong because What happens ultimately is that, and I hate to be that guy because I think it sounds so gay, but it's the black and brown people that are then the ones that are left holding the bag.
I mean, it's the rich corporations and the rich whites or Jews or Chinese in the city that have all the mobility.
They're the ones with the capital.
If they don't like that the Magnificent Mile is getting ripped up by shoplifters, guess what they're gonna do?
Move.
They're going to take their money, take their business, and their tax dollars, and they're going to leave.
And so, who's going to be there to fund DEM programs?
Who's going to be there to fund DEM schools and everything?
All they're doing is growing the radius of the ghetto, rather than improving it.
So, when I say it's wrong, I don't just mean it's obviously ethically, morally wrong.
It's also just straight up incorrect.
But I don't even think they're interested in that.
It's based not in a true desire to improve society, but it's about rectifying some sort of historical grievance.
In other words, they're not interested in making society better.
A guy like Brandon Johnson doesn't dream of excellence.
He doesn't dream of a Of an opulent public fountain in the center of the city, and an elderly couple, and a young teenage romance, and an ice cream stand, and an old person feeding the birds.
He doesn't dream of that.
He doesn't dream of skyscrapers going into the air and industry and innovation.
He dreams of white people getting fucked up.
That's what he dreams of.
And that's all they dream of.
The Obamas, Brandon Johnson, Lori Lightfoot, this guy in New York City.
That's all they dream of.
They don't have dreams.
They don't want to expand into the stars or the sky.
They have this weird hang-up, this weird chip on their shoulder, where they just want to bring the white man down.
And they want to see black people do a little better.
But more than that, they want to see the white man brought down.
They like to see the white stuff go down so it can satisfy some feeling of inferiority within them, some sort of trauma they had growing up.
That's what it is, fundamentally.
I mean, because any sane, decent person who wants society to improve would obviously be against this.
It's not even like it's a difficult issue.
But they have this shit-eating grin when they pass laws like this, where they know full well the consequence, and they know that conservatives are going to lose their minds, and a part of them likes that.
A part of them gets off on it.
They're like, yeah, we're going to pass this.
We're going to pass this bill that gets rid of cash bond or cash bail.
And they know that the cops are going to protest and they know conservatives are going to be pissed.
Talk radio is going to be talking about it.
And they know full well the consequences.
And a part of them gets off on that.
They like that.
So, the point is this.
Conservatives need to be comfortable that these people are our enemies, like they are the enemy of civilization.
We want a coalition of people, no matter, honest to God, no matter who they are, and I joke earlier about like minorities and poor people and whatever, but honest to God, we need a coalition of people that want to have a good society again.
Like, it's that simple.
They want good things.
Like, I know that sounds so... like you would presume that everyone would want that, but they don't.
We need a coalition of people that want to live in a beautiful, harmonious, thriving city, and to basically make it work however we need to do that.
And yeah, that is going to involve a lot of cops, and it's going to involve a lot of people being incarcerated.
And yes, they're going to be one or two colors.
And we are going to be called fascists for doing it, and we are going to be called racists for doing it, and they're not going to like us.
But, like, we have to be willing to do that in pursuit of Just an orderly society.
I don't know why that's controversial I don't know why I get called people say you're making the right look bad for saying that I Don't need to help the right make itself look bad.
They do that all the time No matter who you look at So that that's my view on the Cashless bail and all this.
The real red pill is that they know.
They know.
You know all these boomers, and I know because I live in this state, all the old white boomers in this state Who are just lewd.
They read their Sun Times newspaper and they're pissed when stuff like this happens.
And they go, man, these knuckleheads in Springfield, in Chicago, man, they don't know what they're doing.
But that's just it.
Not to be Rubio here, but it's like they know exactly what they're doing.
That's the point.
When you post these graphics about a thousand cops are resigning every year and the crime is surging, they know they're inviting more of it.
They like that.
They dream of a society like this.
They don't want things to work.
They literally think that our vision of what a good society looks like is a dystopian fascist nightmare.
If I were to paint a picture for you that I just did of the opulent public fountain in the city square with people of all ages getting together and it's clean and pristine what they see is a nightmare.
Because in their sick, twisted minds they say, oh, well, we're all the homeless people.
They were probably all exterminated.
Oh, we're all the black people.
They're probably all in jail.
Oh, you know, the only reason it's like that is because of all this oppression happening.
And they will not rest until that beautiful picture that did exist here a hundred years ago is totally turned upside down.
The homeless gotta be on the streets, the criminals gotta be out, people gotta be afraid, because then they can tell themselves, haha, okay, yeah, no more fascism, no more of those white rich assholes telling everybody what to do.
People are gonna be naked walking around and there's gonna be bums and people smoking pot and people shooting each other and And they say, finally, finally, a little bit of freedom here, huh?
No more of these boring white guys telling us what to do.
Yeah, everything's ugly and gross and whatever, but this is beautiful, man.
This is diversity.
It's what they want.
And so our job is to get everybody who wants to live in a nice society on our side.
That's our job, is to get all the people out there that want the picture I described to vote our way.
Uh, and some of them don't know that they do.
Some of them... That's why I've always said that America First is inevitable.
Because eventually things are going to get really ugly and people are going to realize, oh wait a second...
I don't want it to be this way.
People are gonna see and it's happening every day.
People see the crime and they see homeless people masturbating and it happens here in Oak Park, which was once a nice area in Chicago.
There was a story the other day of some homeless guy jerking off in the street and people shit in the street and there's bums everywhere and trash everywhere and slowly but surely you start to see people say, hey wait a second, I don't like this.
They're getting a little buyer's remorse.
And eventually I think those people are going to be willing to vote for fascism.
Because they're going to say, that sounds a lot better than what we have going on right now.
Because they're not being told the whole story.
They're being sold this bill of goods of like, everything's gonna remain fundamentally the same, we're just getting rid of all these meanie pants policies where kids are getting arrested for no reason and liberals go, sign me up!
And then a 16 year old blows their fucking head off for an iPhone and their friends and family say, wait a minute!
Never mind!
Put their black asses in jail forever.
Eventually I feel like that's what's going to happen.
That's what happened in the 80s and 90s and history will repeat itself soon.
That's the hope.
So that's cashless bail.
But I want to move on.
I want to get into our featured story about Russell Brand.
And like I said, you know, I haven't talked too much about Russell Brand on the show before.
I've never really crossed paths with him because he is sort of like in this space not like not like our space but in like the broader online right dissident right space but I've never really had a run-in with him and I don't know that I've ever talked about him and I'll just say this I've never been very interested in his content
Because he, in my opinion, represents this genre of free thinkers, but they're really just mainstream conservatives.
They go out there and say, I'm really out there.
I want it to be as edgy and interesting as possible.
I'm a conspiracy theorist.
I want to go there.
But they hang out in the shallow end of the pool.
They're out of their ankle deep in like basic bitch mainstream conservative talking points while they're championing themselves as free thinkers and I'm not politically correct.
I'm not afraid to offend the left or something.
And so for that reason, I'm just not into it.
I feel the same.
I always felt the same way about Alex Jones to some extent and guys like Joe Rogan.
And here's why.
It is true for, uh...
And here's one example.
It is true that the state of Israel wields immense influence in our politics and their fingerprints are on a lot of the most famous conspiracy theories like the Kennedy assassinations and 9-11 and the Iraq War.
That's like one example.
I don't expect a guy like Russell Brand to believe that.
I don't expect him to be obsessed with that or talking about it all the time.
But if he never talks about it at all, you know there's a reason why.
And the reason why is because that's a real third rail.
Meaning that if you touch it, you actually get electrically shocked.
For real.
unidentified
Not like, oh the liberals are cancelling me again!
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Like, you actually receive real severe consequences for ideas.
And to me, at that point, you lose all credibility.
Again, the expectation is not, why is this guy not obsessed with the Jews?
I'm not saying that.
I'm saying that if you talk about, you know, just three of the biggest conspiracy theories over the last 100 years, 9-11, JFK, Iraq War, you could talk about a lot of different things.
You could talk about Building 7, you could talk about weapons of mass destruction, you talk about oil, you could talk about communism and Lee Harvey Oswald and the Deep State and the MIC and all this.
But every single one of those There's like an angle where Israel is heavily implicated.
And so if you don't touch on it at all, if you never bring it up, if you never acknowledge it, if you never even, for the sake of argument, elaborate on it, then that means you're deliberately evading it.
You could even bring it up and say, well, I don't agree with that, but some say this, or I don't agree with it, but we're going to debate it, or I don't agree with it, but here are the facts.
If you never touch it, it's because you are desperately avoiding it, because you don't want to face ramifications.
And that's true of a few things.
That's true of, like, anything Hitler-related, anything Jewish, anything Israel, anything race-related.
Anything that's really going to give you consequences.
They don't want to touch.
And that's where you lose me.
If I wanted to watch somebody stay in their lane, I would watch TV.
If I wanted to watch somebody stay in the shallow end of the pool and talk about the approved talking points with the correct opinions that we're all supposed to have, I'd just watch Fox News.
I don't need to watch some psycho rant and rave and scream about Klaus Schwab and UFOs and whatever.
It's more believable what's on TV.
Because it's really just an extension of that.
You think you're in the deep end, but really you're just in a different part of the kiddie pool.
So I've never been interested in Russell Brand because he strikes me as part of that genre.
And there's a lot of people that operate in that space, and I hate that.
I think it's just, I think it's a grift.
By definition.
Because they're selling people on the idea that, hey, I'm going to tell you the hidden truth.
I'm going to tell you the concealed truth.
I'm going to go there, where no one else will go because it's dangerous.
But then they don't do that.
And it's like, so you're a liar.
And you would never actually do what you say you do because then you would lose money.
It's that simple.
They could all talk about what I talk about.
If I could do it, they could do it.
Here I am on my own platform on Rumble.
If I could do it, they could do it.
They would just make less money.
It's that simple.
If I can talk about these things and still broadcast and be live and get my voice out and get my message out, so could Russell Brand, so could Alex Jones, so could all the rest.
So why don't they engage like this?
Because they would make less money.
Oh, okay.
So you really are the same as the rest of the media then, aren't you?
If you're not really willing to go there?
Anyway, so that's my take on him.
But the big story is about these rape allegations and for what it's worth, so he's been accused, Russell Brand has been accused of sexual assault or rape by four women.
There was a major spread in the British press this weekend about it.
And that's just my opinion of him in general.
And for what it's worth, I do believe that it is, in part, political.
Based on the fact that he is now a conspiracy theorist.
Because even to the extent that he is a conspiracy theorist, I believe the left still wants to take those sorts of people out.
With lawsuits and sexual assault allegations and you name it.
And we know that because they do that to guys like Alex Jones or James O'Keefe or Tucker Carlson.
They still do that, even though, in my opinion, these guys are not really touching the third rail to the extent that they say that they are.
They still do get consequences and I think that's part of it.
We'll go through this report and I will just give you a preview here and say, whenever there are these sex assault allegations, It's sort of unbelievable how in society today we have equated what we call rape today with what rape really is.
And I've said it before, in my opinion what rape really is, is when someone is penetrated against their will.
Well, Like if you go to a stranger and put a gun to their head and then have sex with them while they protest, that is probably like the most rape that a rape could be, in my opinion.
But where we are today, and I feel like it's taken a long time to get here, it's been massaged.
And now it's like if a co-worker is like, Sexually suggestive.
That's now equated with a rape.
And you remember years ago when Me Too happened, it was like, look at this photo from 20 years ago.
His hand was touching my butt!
That's a sexual assault!
That's rape!
And I have taken this controversial view that stuff like that, you could say it's rude or inappropriate, but it's part of life, okay?
I'm maybe more, and here's the thing, I'm Catholic, so I am, I think stuff like that is like morally wrong.
By the same token, people are people.
We all know how human affairs are.
It's messy.
And we know how society is.
Which is to say that when people go out and socialize with each other, it gets messy.
And there's communication issues that go on.
And people fight and people have sex and people do these things and sometimes it's not exactly clear.
And so to create these ironclad laws of like consent, will he touch my butt without affirmative consent?
You know, there are millions of examples every day where a woman's butt is touched and it's perfectly fine and there was no consent given.
Do you understand what I mean?
How many marriages started that way?
How many happily wedded couples for 20 years started because of what would today be considered a sexual assault?
But of course the difference is, well we don't call that one a sexual assault.
It's never identified or put in the media because in that case both parties sort of liked it when it happened and then they liked each other in the future and so it was never an issue.
It only becomes an issue if it's sort of mixed messages.
Well, it wasn't exactly invited, or maybe things went south, maybe things got sour later.
And so I'm of the mind that we've got to be very, we've got to be a little discriminating when it comes to allegations.
We always hear about abuse in relationships, but we know that relationships have a lot of dysfunction in them.
Does anybody come from a household or have a relationship currently or relationship history where everything was up to code?
Everything was perfectly orderly and unproblematic and whatever?
Of course not!
Of course not!
We know that because of our parents, our grandparents, every...because human beings are dysfunctional, every relationship is dysfunctional, and every relationship has a little bit of toxic or something ugly or whatever.
And we can have some, it's not to say that we could have no standards or expectations, but everybody likes to come forward and say, well he did this thing and in isolation it sounds crazy, but we all know how people work and how these scenes are created.
They don't come out of nowhere.
And so that's just a little preface here before we get into it.
And this is a story about Russell Brand from the BBC.
It says, quote, This is what I'm talking about.
Assault and emotional abuse.
Who is to say?
This is what I'm talking about.
Assault and emotional abuse.
Who is to say?
Is that not totally arbitrary?
I digress.
It says the actor and comedian is also said to have behaved inappropriately at work during the height of his fame, including by undressing, making sexual remarks, and acting aggressively.
Oh my.
He worked in Hollywood, a notoriously liberal industry, and he undressed himself?
He made a sexual remark?
In Hollywood?
Where they all fuck each other all the time at orgies and sex parties and they're all gay?
Oh my gosh!
Somebody call the cops!
That's like the other irony.
Everybody knows that Hollywood is totally degenerate and they're all having sex with each other.
It's the most incestuous industry ever.
And they're all liberal and tolerant and whatever.
They're all theater kids and we know how that was.
And then stuff like this goes on.
They're like, a guy undressed in his dressing room in front of a woman.
And they're like, call the cops.
You know, we just got done talking about the cashless bail in Chicago.
They get home from their ACAB, defund the police protest, and they say, what?
Russell Brand made a sexual remark?
Call the police!
Yeah, put his ass in jail, fucking rapist, abuser.
You know, it's like, this is why we can't let women make decisions, because they're retarded, and they will do that, and see no problem with it.
George Floyd, a 10-foot Freaking guy who goes around raping, or not raping, but burglarizing pregnant women and he's on fentanyl.
Gentle giant!
Be careful of those handcuffs!
You're choking him!
Then Hollywood where everyone's having sex all the time.
Oh my gosh, a male was handsy with a woman?
Get the police.
That's what we should have police for, for things like this.
It says Brand denies the allegations revealed in a joint investigation by the Sunday Times, The Times, and Channel 4's dispatches, and says his relationships have always been consensual.
Four women are alleging sexual assaults between 2006 and 2013.
So ten years ago.
It says one woman alleges that Brand raped her without a condom against a wall in his home.
She says Brand tried to stop her leaving until she told him she was going to the bathroom.
She was treated at a rape crisis center on the same day which the Times says it is confirmed through medical records.
A second woman in the UK alleges that Brand assaulted her when he was in his early 30s and she was 16 and still at school.
She alleges he referred to her as the child during an emotionally abusive and controlling relationship.
Looking back, she says he engaged in the behaviors of a groomer.
Which, by the way, this is another one where it's like, first of all, the age of consent in the UK is 16.
So, whatever anybody wants to say, I thought the gold standard of sexual morality was the age of consent.
Isn't that the whole premise?
Isn't that what it means?
You're old enough to consent to sex?
But then, they want to go out and say, well, but I was groomed!
So, it sounds like what you're saying is that you were unable to consent.
So what does that word even fucking mean?
What is an age of consent?
Well, she was 16, but she was groomed.
And what grooming means is, well, she was manipulated, so it's not like she really gave her full consent.
Okay.
So when can a woman make a decision that she can be held accountable for?
When can that happen?
At what age?
Under what circumstances?
Because it kind of sounds completely arbitrary.
It kind of sounds like a woman can do whatever she wants, but if it doesn't go the way she wants it to, she can always claim that she wasn't really responsible.
She didn't really give full consent.
Very nebulous term.
She was groomed.
But how much do you want to bet that this 16-year-old who is of age and who willingly participated in this, how much you want to bet that she had an awesome time and she was loving every second of it?
Are we not going to pretend that like a 16-year-old girl who's having an affair with a celebrity Is not fully choosing that and loving it and it's so glamorous and she's writing in her diary about it and oh my gosh she picked me up and blah blah blah.
Are we also not gonna pretend like she's not fondly remembering that?
Are we also going to pretend like she doesn't still think or dream about it?
I mean, seriously?
Knowing what we know about men and women?
That's maybe the worst defense of this whole culture that we have, is it just fundamentally denies the reality of the sexes.
Sex is disturbing.
I hate to break it to people.
But it is not, just like war, it is not something that can be Treated like a like an office environment like a workplace.
You can't bring HR into something like sex That's just true, I mean the thing is about human society is That at the end of the day like we are these fallen creatures with these sinful impulses
And so when it comes to these kinds of matters, you know, all bets are off.
People want to go in there and say, oh, well, so-and-so was too young or this was too aggressive or this and that and whatever.
And it's like, Are you a human being?
That's so much of when I talk about real human being, that's a big part of it.
It's like realizing that we're people, we have hearts, we have passions, we have emotions, and we live these lives that are full of experiences.
And it's honestly liberals that want to come in and ruin the party.
It's liberals that want to come in and spoil all the fun.
And I'm not, as you know, an advocate for promiscuity.
I'm not an advocate for debauchery and degeneracy.
By the same token, we also understand what makes us human, which is those kinds of passions and experiences and feelings and that sort of thing.
And it's like liberals want to go in there and say, sign on the dotted line.
That's not appropriate.
That's abuse.
That's manipulation.
That's grooming.
It's like we would live in a world where there's no spark.
There's no fire.
There's no passion.
There's no seduction.
There's no romance.
There's no nothing in the world that liberals want to create.
Liberals want to come around and put a fucking flag in everybody's hand and They want to put a date on the calendar for their activist day.
They want to go to the print shop and make t-shirts for everybody and give them a fucking clipboard.
And that's what they want life to be for everybody and for all things.
And that's just bullshit.
Like they're killing humanity with that mindset.
And that's even what they do with stuff like this.
And I'm not justifying it.
I think it is messed up.
In a normal society, do you know what would happen?
Russell Brand would find a girl like this and marry her.
And it would be totally appropriate.
He would find a 16 or 17 year old girl, and she would fall in love with him, and he would marry her.
And they would be in love forever.
Because that's just how it's supposed to work, basically.
And the parents would be more involved and everything.
And it would be an unbreakable marriage and they'd wait until marriage and everything.
But that's how it would go.
And everybody would be just fine.
Nobody would be hurt by this.
It wouldn't be a problem.
They would have 10 kids.
And this is basically how it goes.
So, in other words, you know, my problem with it as the stodgy, incel, puritanical Catholic is to say, hey, the only problem with it is that they're not married.
Put a ring on it and do it and have kids and it could be a beautiful romance.
liberals want to come in and say hey you know she could be a freaking porn star and they could have as much sex as they want but the tactics he used were manipulative and abusive and words were behind you girl and blah blah blah and that's wrong you know and they're they're just so wrong about that So anyway, so that's allegation number two, is the 16-year-old.
A third woman claims that Brand sexually assaulted her while she worked with him in LA.
She alleges she repeatedly told him to get off of her, and when he eventually relented, he flipped and was super angry.
Which, what does that even mean?
He was super angry and he flipped out.
So what does that mean?
He was like kissing her?
Really?
She says he threatened to take legal action if she told anyone about her allegation.
And the fourth woman has alleged being sexually assaulted by Bran in the UK and him being physically and emotionally abusive towards her.
Whatever that means.
In a short statement, the Metropolitan Police said, quote, on Sunday, September 17th, the Met received a report of a sexual assault which took place in central London in 2003, 20 years ago.
Adding the police were in contact with the woman and will be providing her with support.
So that's the whole story here about Russell Brand.
And obviously the first thing, first things first, why do you wait 20 years to file a police report?
I'm always skeptical of that.
And you know what that tells me?
Is that at the time, it was appropriate, but based on modern standards, somebody can milk this and get something out of it.
That's what that tells me.
That if this were brought to the police attention 20 years ago, they'd say big deal.
And it's cultural.
In other words, it wasn't that bad.
We live in America.
Or, in that case, in London.
We don't live in Afghanistan.
So, if they couldn't bring it to the police back then, then it sounds like that's because it really wasn't that bad.
But now that it's 2023, and Russell Brand is politically right-wing and a political target, and now that the standards have changed, now it seems like it's more about how someone can exploit that in a particular way, rather than that it was such a heinous thing.
It was really... deserves the attention of law enforcement.
It seems like when you have... because this is always a story, isn't it?
People want to come forward and say 9-1-1 so 20 years ago me and this guy were alone and like he kissed me when I didn't want him to kiss me and then he got really mad when I pushed him off of me.
Really?
Like to me that is just so ridiculous.
On some level you just have to let it go at that point.
Even if you think it was so wrong.
It's 20 years ago.
Is there no statute of limitations?
And where's the proof?
People come forward and say, um, 911.
Yeah, police.
So in 1991, I was with this guy and we were on a date and, uh, and yeah, I went there and yeah, we were drinking and yeah, I went back to his place and yeah, we started kissing, but then he just was going too far and I told him to stop, but he didn't.
And then he got mad when he eventually did.
Really?
That's just BS.
I feel like that kind of stuff is just so ridiculous on its face.
And you almost have to believe that when stuff comes out 20 years later, especially when it's someone that's politically right-wing that's being accused, that it's just pure opportunism and nothing else.
It's opportunism, it's about, you know, they're jilted, they're still not over it, or they were put up to do it by some group, or they want to write a book, or make some money, or become famous.
That's what that means to me.
If it was ever that serious, then the onus is on the woman to file a police report, especially now.
You got some gripe?
You have some beef?
Look, it's 2023.
File a police report.
If it's so bad.
You know, nobody should be getting raped.
But if you do, go and file a police report.
Go and collect your evidence.
Get witnesses, talk to people, go get a rape kit, whatever, file a police report.
I'm so sick of this like 30 years ago, 20 years ago, there's no evidence, there's no nothing going on, give me a break.
So I do believe, like I said, first things first, it's always ever these right-wing guys that are accused with this kind of stuff.
It would seem to me that he is being made out to be a target because of the political evolution here.
That's one.
Number two is then you have to get into the charges.
And like I said at the very beginning, my idea of rape is like a forced penetration act.
And that's of course wrong.
I think everybody's against that.
I don't think anybody's in favor of a person being violated and assaulted in that way.
And I also think it can happen within a relationship.
Of course that can happen.
But these days, it's like everything is being criminalized and prohibited within a relationship.
But the thing is about relationships, and I, you know, I've never been in one, but I know just from watching movies or talking to people, you just know these things.
That these things are messy and complicated and, you know, In courtship, so much of it is about communication.
And so a lot of these allegations, it happens in the middle of the story, where there's a courtship, there's a flirtation, there's a back and forth, there's dates, in some cases there's a relationship, there's alcohol, you're at a party, you're at an event, they wind up back at the person's house, then they say a brutal rape occurred.
And it's like timeout.
Where did you see this going?
A woman will engage in a protracted courtship and flirtation with a man.
She will receive affection.
She will receive and reciprocate flirtation.
Receive and reciprocate the courtship.
Go on dates.
Introduce alcohol.
Go to a secondary or tertiary location.
It turns to sex and then she says, Wee-woo!
unidentified
Wee-woo!
I didn't say this is okay!
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
Then she wants to become the goalie and say, Nope!
No one's getting in here.
This is a crime.
She wants to throw up a red flag.
Foul.
And it's like, well hang on a second.
In a courtship.
It's a push and pull.
Everybody, you know, it's You express interest, you see if it's reciprocated, then you pick it up, then you get it back.
This is how it goes.
And in this day and age, women, if they regret it, if they wind up not liking it, if they want to stick it to their ex, then they want to come out with a story and say, one night, I was raped against my will.
And it's like, hang on a second.
Well, it seems like you were basically inviting sex Right up until it got there.
Then you decided, oh actually it was totally non-consensual.
unidentified
Yeah, that's not really right.
nick fuentes ▲ ● ▼
If a woman finds herself at a guy's place or a guy is there and he was invited there and they're drunk or whatever it is, you know, it's like she wants to have sex with that guy.
And maybe she doesn't want it that way, or right then and there, but that's not really the same thing as what they make it out to be, which is a rape.
That's like saying if you get in a fight with your friend at a bar, that's the same as some random person punching you in the face in the street.
It's obviously different.
If you go to your buddy's house, and you're drinking beer watching the game, and you get in an argument, and then you beat the shit out of each other, That's way different than if you're walking down the street and somebody sucker punches you and takes your wallet.
That's like the same thing when they compare it.
When they say it's a rape or a sexual assault, they're comparing it to a lady gets held at knife point and raped in an alleyway.
To a guy is invited to her place, and they're drunk, and they've been flirting at work or a bar for a week or a night or whatever, and then something happens.
Well, it's really not quite the same thing, is it?
And that's where you get into this hysterical stuff where they say, it is never the woman's fault!
It is never!
It is always the rapist's fault!
And it's like, never?
The woman never puts herself in that position?
Really?
So if I go into the middle of a black neighborhood like Bruce Willis and Die Hard 3 with a sandwich board that says, I hate niggers, and I get killed by black people, you're gonna say, it is never the victim's fault!
It was not his fault!
Really?
You're gonna say, I had nothing to do with that?
Really?
Similarly, if a woman allows herself to get rizzed up, and she's reciprocating that, and there's a flirtation, and she takes the car back to the guy's place, and they're drinking alcohol, and they wind up in bed making out, and then it turns to sex, and she goes, that's a rape, people are gonna say, oh, it was not her fault, she did... Really?
And I would say that that's every one of these things.
And so much of it could be chalked up to playful, you know, risque, edgy, whatever.
And yeah, I think that probably you could say it's inappropriate or things like that and at some point a person has to face repercussions if they're too aggressive.
I'm not saying it should be open season where you could go and be frisky and everything.
But give me a break.
It turns into this like national news.
He's a rapist.
He's an abuser.
He's a this or that.
Really?
Come on now.
I think people have to kind of get a thicker skin.
Certainly it was like that at one point.
I think, I think certainly in the last century men were probably able to get away with too much.
I'll say that's probably true.
But now we're just getting, it's just getting ridiculous.
And by the way, I say that as an incel.
I say that as somebody that has never, ever been doing anything like that.
So, you know, of course a guy like me comes out and defends this and people say, oh look, some white chutz.
Look, some nerd.
Some nerd incel who's probably so weird.
It's like I'm like the least sexual person I know.
I don't even know any women.
I'm not grabbing anybody or touching anybody or doing shit like that.
So I'm not even defending that like these are my behaviors.
I'm the most prudish person I know.
I'm so not that guy.
But as an observer, as a as a cultural critic, as a societal critic, As a schizoid, asexual loner, I can sort of stand outside of the scene and watch a whole thing unfold and give my honest appraisal.
So that's how I feel about the allegations.
I think the whole thing is BS.
I think you got to present some evidence and there's got to be some standard where it becomes an assault if it's uninvited and you need the whole story.
Take it to a trial.
You know, sue a person.
Take it to the cops.
And then go to trial and people can, and if it's really that bad, and this guy, excuse me, is like a serial, he's just like touching people for no reason, and if it's that bad, then tell it to the judge.
Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
I'm so sick of accusers, accusers, accusations.
Give me a break.
It's a chaotic, messy world.
It's human relations.
Sexuality is a big part of that.
And this kind of stuff happens.
And the sexual assaults that never get reported, never get reported because they are welcomed and accepted and they turn into relationships and marriages.
Some might say that's like an unfortunate turn of phrase, but it's just true.
One woman's sexual assault is another woman's flirtation, you know?
It just depends on whether they want it.
And, you know, I guess some would say, well, that's consent.
I would say, well, it's also just the battlefield.
It's also just a romance battlefield.
Who's to say?
The judge.
The judge will say.
Tell it to the judge.
Otherwise, it's a sob story.
But anyway.
women also are notorious liars so I automatically don't really I know you know women in your life and you know that they embellish everything and sometimes just misremember fabricate things you ask a woman about like a scene that happened at the grocery store and they'll like make shit up and embellish You know, if you've ever been in like a verbal argument with a woman, she will retell it with lies.
But then a woman says, 20 years ago, in a hotel room, this or that happened, and we go, oh my gosh, that's crazy.
Take him away.
Get him!
You know, give me a break.
But ultimately, this just makes the case For why women need to be removed from society, the genders must be segregated, and there should be no sexuality outside marriage.
Ironically, this stuff, this kind of ambiguity doesn't happen in a marriage society.
Because that's really what we are, is a post-marital society.
Marriage means nothing now.
Marriage is like the new long-term partner, basically.
Because people cohabitate before marriage.
They have sex before marriage.
People will date each other for 10 years before getting married.
So what does it really mean?
You know, if you live together, you're sexual, and you've been together for three years, what's the wedding about then?
Isn't that so ridiculous?
It used to be the case that you couldn't live together until you're married.
So then it's like you get married and then you come to the same house together for the first time and stay the night, sleep in the same bed for the first time.
You have sex for the first time.
At least that's how it's supposed to be done.
And so it meant something.
And it lasted, at least it lasted a long time, and it was very serious that people were separated or divorced.
Now, like I said, people cohabitate, they have sex before marriage, they date for years, and then the marriages will last two years, five years, people get married and remarried and divorced and All this.
And so really what defines a society is that we're post-marriage.
Marriage does not meaningfully exist anymore.
I know that it does, but not really.
And as a consequence, there's now just anything goes.
And so now all these other things have entered into the picture, and they've totally confused it and inverted it and perverted it, and now it's just, it's impossible.
That's why it's dysfunctional across the board, you know?
That's why pornography plays such a prominent role in such a disastrous way.
Okay.
And that's why divorce is so huge which is messing up the kids and that's why you have all these loners and lonely people failing to hook up and you know.
Everybody's miserable.
Women are deferring childbirth.
It's like all these catastrophic things are happening because we separated sexuality from marriage.
And now that they're separated, sexuality, which is such a potent, powerful thing, is just unleashed.
And it's going places where it was never supposed to go.
▲
Export Selection