The Manchester Free Press

Sunday • May 26 • 2019

Vol.XI • No.XXI

Manchester, N.H.

Syndicate content Christopher Cantwell
	Christopher Cantwell
Radical Agenda
Updated: 9 min 29 sec ago

Radical Agenda S05E038 – Criminalizing Journalism

Fri, 2019-05-24 18:38 +0000

Julian Assange has been charged with a conspiracy to hack government computers, and violations of the espionage act, for his alleged role in helping Bradley Manning obtain the information Wikileaks notoriously released on his behalf several years ago, as well as for publishing that information. Glenn Greenwald and Micah Lee at the Intercept are pitching a fit that the Trump administration is attempting to “criminalize journalism” by going after Assange.

Per the Justice Department press release;

The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications. Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks. Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her. Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures.

During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange. The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information. During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.” To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.”

Greenwald thinks this is no big deal, because the Obama administration decided that this was “journalism” and opted not to prosecute Assange.

The first crucial fact about the indictment is that its key allegation — that Assange did not merely receive classified documents from Chelsea Manning but tried to help her crack a password in order to cover her tracks — is not new. It was long known by the Obama DOJ and was explicitly part of Manning’s trial, yet the Obama DOJ — not exactly renowned for being stalwart guardians of press freedoms — concluded that it could not and should not prosecute Assange because indicting him would pose serious threats to press freedom. In sum, today’s indictment contains no new evidence or facts about Assange’s actions; all of it has been known for years.

Radical Agenda S05E038 – Criminalizing Journalism

Interesting theory. So because the Obama justice department opted not to indict Assange, that means he shouldn’t be indicted? I’d say that’s a pretty weak argument. The Obama administration committed a lot of crimes, and allowed a lot of criminals to go free, Manning included.

Obama didn’t indict Lois Lerner when she politicized the IRS to sabotage the Tea Party movement. He didn’t indict anyone for the Fast & Furious scandal that got a Border Patrol agent killed. There was not a single arrest or prosecution of any senior Wall Street banker for the systemic fraud that precipitated the 2008 financial crisis. Obama either pardoned or commuted the sentences of 1,927 people during his presidency, more than any President since Truman. He broke a record by granting clemency to 231 federal inmates in a single day. His clemency has differed from that of his predecessors too, in that he almost always freed people from prison with commuted sentences, rather than pardoning people after their release.

The lawlessness of that administration should come as no surprise to anyone, and definitely should not set a precedent for future administrations.

This case is of particular interest to me, for a few reasons.

Back when this all happened, and the “Collateral Murder” video came out, I was heavily involved with the libertarians, and staunchly anti-war. All of my associates were pointing to that video as proof that the United States military was running around murdering innocent people for no reason whatsoever.

I saw things differently. I saw a grainy video from a helicopter of soldiers in a war zone observing a group of male adults walking down the street with god knows what in their hands, and after communicating with their superiors, opening fire. Even then, I thought this was completely blown out of proportion, even if it did turn out that those killed were non-combatants.

The war was wrong, but I saw those soldiers as completely blameless. I was infuriated by the libertarians and others who called them murderers.

Sorry, civilians! These things happen in war. This is just one of many reasons why we should be a lot more cautious about why, when, and where, we engage in martial conflicts.

Yet, I still supported Manning and Wikileaks. While manning was on trial at Fort Meade, I went there to cover the trial for Adam vs. The Man, and stayed at Kokesh’s house in Herndon, Virginia.

In fact, here’s a photo of me leaving the trial.

As I drove from New York to Virginia, I had “FREE BRADLEY MANNING” written with paint on the windows of my van. I did not care if what they did was illegal. I did not care if what they did hindered the war effort. I did not care if what they did jeopardized other interests of the United States government. As far as I was concerned, the war was based on lies, and unjustifiable. If people had to break the law and act deceptively to stop it, then that was just fine with me.

I feel differently today, and not just because Manning turned out to be a tranny communist, or Assange mocked me on Twitter when I was framed for crimes in Charlottesville.

My attitude began to change when Obama commuted Manning’s sentence.

Manning had been sentenced to 35 years in prison for his treason. In prison, he decided he was going to “gender transition,” which endeared him all that much more to the communists who celebrated his disloyalty to his country.

The Obama administration had never been big on transparency, or shy about using government force against anyone who stood in their way. It seemed profoundly curious to me, that Barack Obama would set Manning free, simply out of some desire to do the right thing. In fact, I was certain there had to be some other reason for his release.

It turns out, I was right.

Manning did not use his newfound freedom and notoriety to fight for liberty or transparency in government after his release. He used it to promote communism.

He cheered on the rioting Reds in Charlottesville, and encouraged antifa violence from coast coast.

When he ran for the US Senate, his platform read like an intentional plan to destroy the country. In fact, he all but confessed that it was on Twitter, by retweeting a fellow degenerate who said “abolish ICE, open the border, dismantle all detention centers and dance joyously in the rubble“.

I was all for ending the wars. Still am, all these years later. In fact, that was much of my motivation for supporting Trump, and his failure to stop this insanity remains one of my greatest disappointments in his administration. But that was and is out of a desire to see the best interests of my country put ahead of those of Israel.

Anybody wanting to reduce my country to rubble through immigration, lawlessness, and communism, surely has a very different agenda than I, and dare I say it, a far more radical one at that.

Come to think about it, reducing the country to rubble seems to be at the forefront of the policy agenda for the Democrat party at this point. Reliably, their propagandists in the media seem to have the same itinerary.

Back to the Intercept;

The other key fact being widely misreported is that the indictment accuses Assange of trying to help Manning obtain access to document databases to which she had no valid access: i.e., hacking rather than journalism. But the indictment alleges no such thing. Rather, it simply accuses Assange of trying to help Manning log into the Defense Department’s computers using a different username so that she could maintain her anonymity while downloading documents in the public interest and then furnish them to WikiLeaks to publish.

In other words, the indictment seeks to criminalize what journalists are not only permitted but ethically required to do: take steps to help their sources maintain their anonymity.

Another interesting theory.

Firstly, it is hacking a computer to crack a password. It is exceeding ones privileges to log in as another user. If Assange did this, then he did help Manning hack the computers, by definition. If he helped them hack the computers, then that explains why he was also charged with publishing the material. He wasn’t acting as a mere journalist who received information without participating in the crime. He actively conspired to obtain the material he wanted to publish, and then he published it. One act was in furtherance of the other.

The fact that Greenwald says journalists do this all the time should tell you something about journalism. These people are criminals, and they shouldn’t be granted special privileges just because they have broadcast licenses or newspapers. “Freedom of the Press” means freedom, as in, the same freedom you and I have, not license to do things we would go to prison for.

And for that matter, why should we grant journalists that much “freedom” anyway? Should they shoulder no extra responsibilities with the enormous power that they wield?

How many of you have seen Con Air? In that movie, Nicholas Cage plays Cameron Poe, a highly decorated United States Army Ranger, came home to Alabama to his wife, Tricia. He only to run into a few drunken regulars at the bar where Tricia works and they get in a fight. Cameron unknowingly kills one of the drunks by punching the guy’s nose into his brain, and is sent to a federal penitentiary for involuntary manslaughter for seven years, because his military training made his hands “deadly weapons”. Because he was so trained to kill, he was saddled with extra liability for the damage he did.

Same thing for anybody who carries a gun. There are things you can do while you are unarmed, which you cannot do while you carry, and for good reason.

Letting people run amok and endanger the country just because they call themselves “journalists” is as stupid as saying I can pick a fight with whoever I want, just because I’m carrying a pistol.

Julian Assange thought it was hillarious that I was in tears facing 60 years in prison for crimes I didn’t commit. I wonder if he’s crying now that he could spend the rest of his life in prison for crimes he actually did commit?

Fuck him, and fuck the media.

Assange was their hero when he was conspiring with Manning to leak government secrets. Using that Collateral Murder video to demonize the Bush administration was something they all universally supported. Then, when Wikileaks was publishing information that was unfavorable to Hillary Clinton, suddenly Assange was some kind of Russian spy.

Now that he’s being prosecuted for the leaks that they did like, he’s a martyr for the first amendment. Curious creatures, these journalists. They didn’t seem to think so much of the first amendment when they were were cheering on communists who attacked us at our permitted demonstration in Charlottesville. They didn’t seem to think so much about freedom of speech when they were calling for White Nationalism, a political idea, to be pursued like foreign terrorist organizations. They didn’t seem to think much about press freedom when they went after Infowars and Alex Jones.

And what’s so special about the first amendment, anyway? Why do journalists care so much about that one, but insist that the second amendment is just some anachronistic throwback to a less enlightened time? Why was there no eighth amendment outcry when me and my comrades were held without bail in Charlottesville? Why do they insist that the 4th amendment guarantees women the right to an abortion, but have no problem with Obama spying on the Trump campaign?

At some point you just have to conclude that these people are trying to destroy the country. That being the case, why should any of us care about their supposed “rights” while they do everything in their power to see ours violated?

This is clearly just war by other means. The pen, they say, is mightier than the sword, after all. So at what point do we take their swords away?




This blog post and opening monologue is incomplete and will be updated before showtime at 5pm US Eastern time. I am publishing it ahead of time as a show announcement so people know to tune in at 5pm. 

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

MRP.insert({ 'url':'', 'lang':'auto', 'codec':'mp3', 'volume':60, 'introurl':'', 'fallback':'', 'radiotype':'icecast', 'autoplay':false, 'jsevents':false, 'buffering':5, 'title':'Radical Agendas ', 'welcome':'Radical Agendas Radio Network', 'bgcolor':'#343434', 'wmode':'transparent', 'skin':'mcclean', 'width':180, 'height':60 });

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at


This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 

Become an Premium Member! Shop At! Like my voice? Hire me to read the text of your choice at



 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S05E038 – Criminalizing Journalism appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 202 | The Huddled Masses

Fri, 2019-05-24 11:43 +0000

The year is 2060.

All divergent properties of gender and race have been eliminated.

All breeding is centrally planned by the International Monetary Fund.

Oil is illegal.

Plastic is illegal.

Being white is a hate crime.

Public schools are Drag Queen Story Hour, all day every day.

All local, state, and federal powers in every country have been ceded to the United Nations, and the world is dominated by a small group of coastal elites who now reside on the moon with Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos.

Is this is the future our ELITES have planned for us? We’ll be exploring the question!

We’ve also got BREAKING NEWS about a memorandum signed by President Trump that will force those who sponsor immigrants to reimburse the Federal government for their welfare use.

This is EPISODE 202 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!



 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 202 | The Huddled Masses appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

PodZeen 69 – Sixty Nine

Thu, 2019-05-23 19:49 +0000

We have reached the fabled episode 69. Get it? It’s like… 69 bro lol. In this episode we completely fail to talk about any topics whatsoever. Classic Zeen!

Watch us on BitChute!

  • Bebe U Wurf It
  • Longview – Green Day
  • All By Myself – Green Day
  • Dr. Feelgood – Mötley Crüe
  • Clown world
  • Unsainted – Slipknot
  • Redneck Shit – Wheeler Walker Jr
  • Morrissey the Nazi
  • We Want Some Pussy – 2 Live Crew
  • Nibber Bunghole Database
  • Mapplethorpe Grey – Pig Destroyer
  • Where’s the bass player?
  • Look but Don’t Touch – Polyphia
  • Work It – Missy Elliot
  • Enjoy Your Day – Alkaline Trio
  • Hungry Like the Wolf – Duran Duran
  • Physical Education – Animals As Leaders
  • Black Panther with Tupac
  • Not Alone – Dub Trio
  • Dancers to a Discordant System – Meshuggah
  • Fido Your Leash is Too Long – Magnetic Fields
  • Baby Container – Orifice A



BUY OUR MERCH – http://www.Obzeen.Rocks/shop/

DONATE – http://www.Obzeen.Rocks/donate/


SUBSCRIBE on iTunes –

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post PodZeen 69 – Sixty Nine appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 201 | The Troops of Tomorrow

Thu, 2019-05-23 11:43 +0000

Have you ever seen a finer or more awe-inspiring class of West Point graduates?

The media says that this is the most competent and skilled West Point class to ever graduate in the history of the academy. Their secret weapon?


We’ve also got the latest on Maine’s “sanctuary state” bill.

This is EPISODE 201 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!


 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 201 | The Troops of Tomorrow appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Outlaw Conservative S01E019 – MANA

Wed, 2019-05-22 17:56 +0000

This morning I finished reading Michael Malice’s new book “The New Right“, for which I had been interviewed, and earned the coveted space of being the last “New Right” figure featured before the concluding chapter. I’ll provide more commentary on that next week, as the book deserves a more thoughtful response than I’ll be able to come up with before showtime today, and because it will necessarily involve commentary unfit for the Outlaw Conservative podcast.

For now I’ll say that the book is a very good read. I haven’t been that glued to a book since I was in solitary confinement back in Virginia. Malice also provides some valuable perspective, which was interesting given his ethnic background, and the subject matter being addressed.

One topic worth discussing here is the concept of Narrative, which comes up repeatedly throughout the text. What Malice sees as amongst the most crucial functions of the New Right – in which he includes both the so called “Alt Lite” and “Alt Right” – is our attacks on the “Cathedral” and it’s pervasive control over the Narrative.

Referring to the Left in religious terms is likely a familiar concept to many Outlaw Conservative listeners. Their ideas are certainly not based in anything resembling the nature of the human condition, and often seem aimed at accomplishing something in a parallel universe at the expense of this one. The Cathedral is a term coined by Mencius Moldbug of Unqualified Reservations, to describe the system of how consent is manufactured. Ideas flow out from the universities, and into the media, and public schools, and eventually “they become our old friend, ‘public opinion.'”

Depending on the minute you ask me the question, my outlook for the future might be hopelessly grim, or nauseatingly positive, and it can change that dramatically from one minute to the next. In my hopeful moments, I see this system collapsing on itself, as the ideas of the Cathedral become so hopelessly detached from those of the people whose lives they are destroying, that the system loses its power to dictate narratives.

There is a lot of handwringing in conservative circles about how we abandoned the universities, and how this has allowed the Left to have the obscene cultural influence they wield over us today. There are good reasons to voice such concerns of course, but there does exist a potential upside. As the professors ceased to find anyone to challenge their ideas, save for the students, and they used their power over the students to crush even that dissent, they completely lost touch with the rest of the society. This in turn caused the media to do the same, and just as social media began to expose them to the much needed criticism that causes one to contemplate one’s course, the social media platforms banned all those who contradicted the increasingly out of touch narratives, permitting them to become ever more out of touch.

This could easily spell disaster in the very near future, to the extent it will influence upcoming elections in favor of the Cathedral’s dutiful servants in government. Should we survive that just a little bit longer though, it is difficult to imagine these people being taken seriously for long after that. Insisting that there is no crisis at our Southern border, that men can get pregnant, and that the President of the United States with all his Jewish inlaws is a not-so-secret Nazi and simultaneous agent of the Kremlin, then lashing out with violence and deception at anyone who dares disagree, does incredible damage to one’s credibility in the eyes of the sane.

A British-American philosopher by the name of Alan Watts once said “A person who thinks all the time has nothing to think about except thoughts. So he loses touch with Reality, and lives in a world of illusion.”

This describes perfectly the state of the Cathedral today. As they became convinced of their own elite status, and the superiority of their own minds over even the physical universe and their own biology, they walled themselves off from all criticism, got stuck in their own heads, and went crazy. This is precisely why so many civil rights groups view solitary confinement as a form of torture, a position I can sympathize with after spending over a month in such a box. Their ideas have become so completely absurd, that even the children they have inducted into their public schools have trouble believing them, and they are, as a direct result, losing their ability to dictate what constitutes acceptable opinion.

They can feel this power slipping from their grasp, and the anxiety of this only accelerates the decline of their faculties. They have become incapable of communicating with the people they hope to control, and view all deviations from their desired course as some kind of unnatural intrusion upon their divine edict to rule over us. They try to stamp it out with force and deception, only to realize this perceived pestilence is steeped into the foundation and the beams, it permeates the air, clouds the drinking water, and has taken up all the prime real estate in the minds of their once loyal subjects.

Suddenly, they can no longer decide what constitutes “Normal”, because they are the oddity.

With this fresh in my mind, I was brought to side splitting laughter by a piece in the LA Times by Doyle McManus titled. “Joe Biden’s campaign pitch: Make America Normal Again”

This seems less than likely, I’d say. Joe Biden kicked his campaign off by acting like Charlottesville 2017, and your humble correspondant, were the most important issues of next year’s election. Clearly, he has been spending far too much time in the Ivory Towers of the Cathedral, if he believes that. Should he dare to insist that pregnancy is a woman’s job, he’ll be run out of the Democrat Party, and good luck convincing Americans that record breaking numbers of illegal immigrants gaming our asylum laws, then skipping court, is something they ought to get used to.

McManus begins the piece voicing his early skepticism of Biden’s chances. He points out that many, he included, questioned “whether a gaffe-prone 76-year-old symbol of last-century politics could survive in a next-generation campaign.”

With 38% of Democrats supporting him in early polls, this foot soldier of the Cathedral seems to think Biden has beaten the odds.

Let us hope they remain so glib on election day, so we can see the panicked look on their faces as the results are announced.

He goes on to say;

The former vice president’s kickoff speech in Philadelphia last weekend showed why. It was vintage Biden: folksy, garrulous, at once conciliatory and combative — and focused almost entirely on defeating President Trump.

“You want to know what the first and most important plank in my climate proposal is?” he said. “Beat Trump.”

With that as his refrain, Biden is putting himself squarely where Democratic voters are. Polls show that most Democrats yearn for a candidate — any candidate — who can credibly promise to unseat the president. Virtues like “has new ideas” and “represents a new generation” rank much lower.

Interesting indeed, that even Democrats have just about had it with all these “new” ideas coming from the Cathedral and its mouthpieces. All they want is an old White guy who can bring them back to the good old days of 2015.

But of course, the Cathedral’s most ardent devotees are having none of this. Those pesky “liberals” have gotten in the way of the Left for too long, and now is the time to abandon all pretenses of adoration for democratic ideals. Charlottesville resident Phil Woodson of the “Clergy Collective” clearly sees Biden as symptomatic of the very “White Supremacy” he claims to be fighting against. In a Letter to the Editor published at the Daily Progress, Pastor Phil attacks Creepy Joe for his lack of financial support to the scam charities which emerged in the wake of that communist riot. He decries the lack of a plan to “remove the idols of white supremacy” and encourages his fellow communists to “hold these candidates to a higher standard” when they inevitably come to that socialist cesspool pandering for political advantage.

For them, defeating Trump is not good enough. They want to defeat America, and anyone who gets in their way is a traitor to the revolution, and the memory of a “brave young woman”, who reluctantly gave up Newports for the struggle.

Nevermind that the voters they’ll need for victory overwhelmingly oppose the removal our Nation’s history by out of touch criminals incapable of experiencing satisfaction. For them, this is not about the realities on the ground, but the ideas they have been residing with to the exclusion of all others. Giving voters what they want is simply out of the question, since the voters are Nazis as evidenced by the election of Donald Trump. They’ll be happy to give the whole democracy thing another shot after 2044 when those pesky Americans have finally lost their electoral majorities, but for now they need someone who can take power by force and impose the will of the Cathedral on the ingrates who have rejected their marvelous wisdom.

With such absurdities passing for strategy in the criticism immune minds of our communist counterparts, I am, at this moment anyway, feeling quite optimistic about the road ahead. A second term for the God Emperor might not give us all that we want, but it will, as Joe Biden put it “forever, and fundamentally, alter the character of this Nation. Who we are.”

Good luck blaming his second term on “RUSSIA!” or painting the second term of his presidency as “an aberrant moment in time”.

That outcome, I suspect, will have been brought about not so much by our meme magic, or any particular brilliance on the part of the Israel fellator and chief, but rather by the intellectual isolation those diversity lovers of the Cathedral have chosen for themselves.

America is normal again, Creepy Joe, and we aim to keep it that way. We’ll cling to our guns, and some of us to our God, while you and your ilk cling desperately to the truly aberrant moment in time. Namely, that brief instant when Americans were so enthralled by their smartphones and parenthetical distractions, that they almost forgot how babies are made.

We’ve snapped out of that now, and Greatness is the New Normal.


Join us, this and every Wednesday from 5-7pm US Eastern time for another exciting episode of Outlaw Conservative!

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

I’m looking forward to hearing from you at 808-4-Outlaw, and the more you talk the less I have to, so please do give us a call.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

MRP.insert({ 'url':'', 'lang':'auto', 'codec':'mp3', 'volume':60, 'introurl':'', 'fallback':'', 'radiotype':'icecast', 'autoplay':false, 'jsevents':false, 'buffering':5, 'title':'Radical Agendas ', 'welcome':'Radical Agendas Radio Network', 'bgcolor':'#343434', 'wmode':'transparent', 'skin':'mcclean', 'width':180, 'height':60 });

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at

Become an Outlaw Conservative premium member today to support this production, and get access to members only perks! Donate to the production of Outlaw Conservative using your credit or debit card at Shop At

This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. I sell shirts, hats, mousepads, and other cool stuff, though sadly, we can only accept cryptocurrency. Or you can just fork over money by donating.



 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Outlaw Conservative S01E019 – MANA appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 200 | Maine to Become Sanctuary State

Wed, 2019-05-22 11:39 +0000

You probably thought it couldn’t happen in New England, or maybe you thought it would happen to Vermont first, but the Maine state legislature will be debating a proposal today to turn Maine into a Sanctuary State.

If passed, it will become ILLEGAL for law enforcement to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, stop, arrest, search or publish the identities of suspected illegal aliens.

In other words…

Illegals will become a protected class with more rights and privileges than actual citizens. Let that sink in.

We’ll also be talking about tax funded abortion, the collateral cost of cultural enrichment, and potential appointment of Kris Kobach as immigration czar.

This is EPISODE 200 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 200 | Maine to Become Sanctuary State appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 199 | The Huawei Situation

Tue, 2019-05-21 11:31 +0000

Donald Trump ruined my show prep.


Markets started to PANIC yesterday on news that Huawei would be effectively banned in America due to last week’s executive order barring U.S. companies from using telecommunications equipment that the secretary of Commerce declares to be a national security risk.

Trump’s reaction? Reverse the ban and give Huawei an extra 90 days.

Womp womp. It’s hard to maneuver when you tie your legacy to the stock market, isn’t it?

For this episode, I’m going to explain the Huawei situation in cogent detail for those of you who haven’t been red boxed on it yet.

This is EPISODE 199 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 199 | The Huawei Situation appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Radical Agenda S05E037 – Spoiler Alert

Mon, 2019-05-20 18:35 +0000

If you’re a Game of Thrones fan and you’re not caught up, I must warn you that this episode of the Radical Agenda will contain spoilers. So hopefully you’re either caught up, or lucky enough not to be afflicted with the terrible disease of this addiction.

The 8th and final season of Game of Thrones reached a rather anticlimactic conclusion last night. Throughout the story, Kings and Queens were murdered, the dead waged war against the living, magic conjured ghosts and brought men back from death, and with the help of some dragons and an army of slaves and savages, a powerful and just woman nearly came to rule Westeros.

Radical Agenda S05E037 – Spoiler Alert

But the feminists were left disappointed in the end, as the final battle of the great war seemed to occur just as Daenerys Targaryen began to bleed from her most permanent wound. Rather than take the wisdom of her male advisors, and wait out Cersei Lannister, she laid waste to King’s Landing, killing countless innocent men, women, and children, including those loyal to her, as dragon fire rained down on the once great city, reducing it to rubble.

So grotesque was her brutality, that even the hand of the Queen, an imp who murdered his own father, refused to be party to her savagery going forward.

Undeterred, the Mother of Dragons imprisoned her most loyal advisor. She stood before her army and called on them to similarly “liberate” the whole world, vowing that the war would not end until every corner of the globe was under her rule.

Jon Snow, who we recently learned was no bastard, but rather Aegon Targaryen, the true heir to the Iron Throne, would not abide this tyranny. He put a knife through the heart of the Breaker of Chains, as he kissed his aunt for the final time, and barely survived as her furious dragon melted the Iron Throne.

This left the Lords and Ladies of Westeros in a difficult position. With the Unburnt dead, and the only living Targaryen the prisoner of warrior eunuchs, a new Sovereign would have to be chosen.

As they contemplated how to choose, Samwell Tarly made a novel suggestion. “We represent all the great houses. But whoever we choose, they won’t just rule over Lords and Ladies. Maybe, the decision about what’s left for everyone, should be left to, well, everyone.”

A long pause ensued, before the men cracked up laughing, adding in jest, that perhaps dogs and horses should have the vote as well. Interesting theme, that even men who had been progressive enough to bend the knee to a single mother as their Queen, saw the folly of democracy as comedically stupid.

In the end, they settled on a combination of oligarchy and secession. The North would remain an independent kingdom ruled by Sansa Stark, and the remaining six kingdoms of Westeros would be ruled by a cripple. Bran the Broken, of House Stark, though he could not sire children, would become King. Convenient, as he had brought his own chair, and the Iron Throne was now a smoldering puddle of molten metal.

Since the Crippled King could not bear children, it was decided that from this day forward, Kings would be chosen, rather than born. Though not by the people, as the Aristocracy of Westeros surely knew that democracy only gives way to Jewish subversion. Upon the King’s death, or the invocation fo the 25th Amendment, the Lords and Ladies of Westeros would meet in the same place to choose a new King.

Jon Snow’s life would be spared for his treason, but he would live out his days on the Night’s Watch, leaving the door open for his return in a future reboot of the series. Perhaps as the next King, should Bran meet an untimely demise. We are told that there are no plans for a ninth season, but that prequels and spinoffs are expected come in the future.

And so the story concludes, for now. But not before giving us an abundance of Leftist handwringing, a choice selection of which I will bring to you today for abundant mockery.

I liked Game of Thrones, personally. There was plenty of messaging for people of our mindset to complain about, but what it really hammered home was the nature of politics, and power more broadly.

Mao Zedong, whatever his other flaws, was right when he said “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” Though Westeros was lacking in this manner of weaponry, the violent and coercive nature of such contests was constantly and perpetually on display throughout the production. For far too many of our fellow citizens, the absurd pageantry of democratic elections lead them to believe that this is all an honest competition, where the most competent leaders emerge through consensus.

In reality, our system of choosing rulers turns out to be barely if at all more tame than the destruction of King’s Landing.

In the leadup to the election of 2016, Democrats weaponized the secret courts of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and launched a counter intelligence operation against the Trump campaign. When that failed to prevent his election, they used whatever power they had remaining inside the bureaucracy to subvert his Presidency. They launched a bogus investigation, manned by a team of enemy partisans, which consumed two years and tens of millions of dollars. When that failed to bring charges, they used its findings to call for his impeachment.

In the interim, masked criminals took to the streets attacking innocent people who supported the President. They set fires, assaulted people with weapons, and framed good men for crimes. Their allies in the Justice Department overlooked their mayhem, and prosecuted their victims. The media likewise supported this crimewave, and even Joe Biden described these hoodlums as “a courageous group of Americans”.

Recall the longest government shutdown in the history of our republic, as Donald Trump attempted to compel Democrats to back wall funding by refusing to fund the rest of the federal government without it. During that standoff, I said something that we all knew to be true. Trump would have to back down, because Democrats would sooner see the destruction of the country, than finance that which was necessary to fend off the ongoing invasion. Nobody who cares about the wellbeing of the Nation, can afford to play chicken with Democrats who, I remind the listener, were huge fans of Daenerys Targaryen.

On social media, they bemoaned her brutality at King’s Landing, but it was not the violence or destruction that troubled them beneath the surface. Rather, they were furious that their ruthless tyrant Queen would surely be deposed, now that her cruel nature had been made clear for all to see. Like the Left, the Mother of Dragons depended on her title as the Breaker of Chains, to dupe the unwitting masses to follow her. She justified her violence by claiming those who stood in her way were enemies not only of her rule, but of freedom. Yet, when those who stood in her way were innocent women and children, she found no greater mercy for them than she did for the masters of Slaver’s Bay. And when she had “liberated” those poor souls from the confines of their bodies, she swore to send her army of slaves and savages to one realm after another, until the whole of mankind knelt before her.

This tragic outcome was only prevented by the dagger of one White Man, who risked his life before the dragon to end her bloodlust. Then, rather than ascend to his rightful place as King, he was handed a life sentence, and sent to the Wall for his heroism.

Like Jon Snow, we have a similarly thankless task ahead of us. Our tyrants portray themselves as the saviors of those whom they hope to destroy. The victims of their deceptions despise those who come to save them. They rejoice at our despair, and make great the temptation to hold them in our contempt.

But our task, however thankless, is of the utmost importance, and we must win them over before we can find any hope for our own salvation. Fortunately, like the Mother of Dragons, our foes cannot help but reveal their true and horrifying nature, more and more with each day they go without the power they so desperately desire.

Once the masses know the truth, they will reject the siren song of their own destruction, and we will help to guide them to better days.



Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

MRP.insert({ 'url':'', 'lang':'auto', 'codec':'mp3', 'volume':60, 'introurl':'', 'fallback':'', 'radiotype':'icecast', 'autoplay':false, 'jsevents':false, 'buffering':5, 'title':'Radical Agendas ', 'welcome':'Radical Agendas Radio Network', 'bgcolor':'#343434', 'wmode':'transparent', 'skin':'mcclean', 'width':180, 'height':60 });

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at


This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 

Become an Premium Member! Shop At! Like my voice? Hire me to read the text of your choice at


 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S05E037 – Spoiler Alert appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

White Nationalist Violence

Sat, 2019-05-18 03:24 +0000

My Google News alert for White Nationalism brought to my attention a post at Reason Magazine by Robby Soave, about his testimony to the House subcommittee on civil rights and civil liberties. He was called as an expert on White Nationalism, in part due to his authorship of a book to be released next Month about the Alt Right, for which I was interviewed.

Soave brought some much needed cool headedness to the hearing.

He pointed out, for example, that often quoted FBI statistics on an uptick in hate crimes are based on misleading data.

While it’s important to be aware that there is still hate and violence in this country, some policy makers and media figures have seized on the idea that hate crimes are actually rising. The FBI reported 7,175 crimes in 2017 vs. 6,121 crimes in 2016, which represents a 17 percent increase. But it’s important to note that nearly a thousand additional municipalities submitted data to the federal government in 2017. This means the perceived increase in hate could partly be explained by the fact that we simply have more data. As the agencies involved in submitting data become more concerned with hate crimes, and more responsible about tallying them, the numbers will appear to be going up.

Bear in mind that the total number of hate crimes tallied by the FBI in 1996 was 8,759, from 11,000 agencies. In 2017, with 16,000 agencies reporting, the total was actually lower by 1,600. The overwhelming majority of municipalities reported zero hate crimes. Most incidents were classified as anti-black or anti-Jewish. Anti-Semitism is a foundational belief of white nationalists and the alt-right, and a recent uptick in anti-Jewish hate would not be surprising. But even here, the numbers do not necessarily support the idea of a full-blown crisis; a survey by the Anti-Defamation League, for instance, noted a 57 percent spike into anti-Semitic incidents in 2017, but this was partly due to a series of bomb threats made against Jewish institutions by a single troubled teenager who lived in Israel. Anti-Semitic violence had in fact declined by 47 percent. And while the following year included truly despicable acts of anti-Semitic violence—specifically the horrifying Tree of Life shooting, in which a white nationalist murdered 11 Jewish worshippers—the total number of anti-Semitic incidents in 2018 was 5 percent lower than 2017, according to the ADL.

On the other hand, I found a couple of his remarks troubling more troubling.

Firstly, he repeated the lie that James Fields murdered Heather Heyer. If one is going to portray himself as an expert on a subject, he should be better informed. James Fields had his home address plugged into his GPS, and he was trying to go home at the time leading up to the car wreck. Dwayne Dixon of Redneck Revolt admits to pointing an AR-15 rifle at Fields just before the crash. In the various videos of the crash, one can see James’s car attacked by numerous “counter protesters” or more accurately, communist terrorists, before he accelerates in an effort to escape them.

After the crash, video captures a young man pulling a pistol from the small of his back to go after James. [Redacted] wrote in the Guardian that he pulled his gun on James after the crash. His car was surrounded and seized upon by club wielding communists, and so he slammed it in reverse and sped away. This is important to understand, because Robby seems to take James’s conviction of murder, and subsequent guilty plea in federal court, as evidence of his actual guilt.

But if three different people drew guns on anyone else during a riot, and they were being attacked by club wielding communists, they would flee that scene with the utmost haste too, and yet James Fields was also convicted of leaving the scene of a crash. This I would hope tingles the reader’s spidy senses enough to get better informed.

James was threatened by violent criminals, he desperately tried to escape them, and in the process, a girl died. Unfortunate indeed, but no murder.

Yet, because his politics are demonized as evil incarnate, he was convicted of premeditated murder and whatever other nonsense the prosecutors attached, and sentenced to life plus 419 years. Facing that prospect, and threatened with the death penalty by the federal government, he pleaded guilty to avoid execution. Similarly to how I pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors in exchange for time served and a one way ticket out of Virginia, to avoid exposure to a felony at trial, even though I can prove 100% that the case was built on lies.

Robby was correct to state that these FBI statistics about upticks in White Nationalist violence are misleading to say the least, but he also notes, perhaps from a sense of obligation, that “it is an indisputable fact that white nationalism and white supremacy are pernicious ideologies with a long history of terrorizing communities of color.”

I can’t speak for all White Nationalists. I certainly have no desire to make common cause with Dylann Roof or Robert Bowers. But my “ideology” is that men should not be convicted of premeditated murder because they got in a car accident, especially not while fleeing from communists who have still not been prosecuted for any of the many crimes they have committed on video in broad daylight. When my country descends to a point where this is happening in full view of the public, and the House of Representatives starts holding hearings on the subject, and the “experts” they call as witnesses, seem blissfully unaware of this state of affairs, I understand why some men feel so hopeless, that they decide to throw their lives away on a senseless act of violence.

When we attempt to participate in the political process, but we are censored and shut out of the financial system, through exactly the sort of fake “free market” censorship Robby describes as “a decision that rests with the social media companies,” I understand how some reach the conclusion that the time for communication and commerce is behind us.

When we are imprisoned for defending ourselves against violent criminals, and not even the libertarians can bother to stand up for our self defense rights, I understand how some decide they might as well strike first. NAP be damned.

On the Radical Agenda, I have taken a pretty hard line against the “accelerationists” in White Nationalist circles. Their view is that we should do everything in our power to see that the Left gets their way, so they will create such vast misery and suffering that the broader White populace “wakes up” and joins our cause. From there, in the chaos of the breakdown of our civil order, death squads can go around putting down the problem populations, until order is restored. In this perspective, Whites emerge victorious, and assert their rightful place as the rulers of their lands.

In my view, this will bring a lot of needless death and suffering. Perhaps more importantly, it will upset our women, and we don’t want the gender ratio of our ethnostate to resemble that of a libertarian conference. I think the libertarians had the right idea with the Free State Project. Political migration and secession represent our best hope at salvation from imminent cataclysm.

Sadly, due to their ignorance of Robert Conquest’s second law of politics (Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing), they were dominated by leftists. This brought with it that signature selective racial blindness, which is necessary not to notice that homogenous White populations tend to produce tolerable governments, in contrast to the absolute hell that is empowered when non-Whites dominate an area. Telling indeed, that former FSP President Carla Gericke was an anti-apartheid activist in South Africa. After accomplishing her goals, and as the newly empowered blacks started murdering Whites, and edging toward communism politically, she fled to New Hampshire with the hopes of abolishing our government.

Should she succeed, one wonders what place she will aim to destroy next?

A Right wing version of the FSP could succeed on a level playing field. Anyone who has listened to any of my work also knows that I would succeed as a radio personality, on a level playing field.

What becomes obvious to those of us who pursue such aims, is that we are not operating on a level playing field. The banking system, the mainstream media, the government, and even Internet service providers, all conspire with violent communist criminals to stop us by way of violence and deception. Good men go to prison for imagined crimes. Those who commit crimes against us are not prosecuted. We are villainized for speaking unpopular truths, and treated as terrorists for our thought crimes.

That sure does raise the difficulty level as I try to make the case for calm, sometimes.

So, should there ever come a day when there actually is an uptick in White Nationalist violence, it will follow on the heels of decades of efforts to assert ourselves peacefully, through the political process. When people conclude that this has no hope of succeeding, and the only alternative to war is to be subjugated by foreigners, they will choose war, and rightly so. When that happens, nobody will need nonsense fake FBI statistics, or lies from the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, to make the case for the White Nationalist threat.

By that time, the White Nationalist threat, will be the governing body.

This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post White Nationalist Violence appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Radical Agenda S05E036 – Adversity Score

Fri, 2019-05-17 18:13 +0000

The SAT, formerly known as the Scholastic Aptitude Test, is a standardized test widely used for college admissions in the United States. As the name implies, it is, or was, designed to measure the readiness of potential students for the rigors of higher education.

As academia descended into the same Leftist filth that floods our Internet with porn traffic, and our televisions with material only slightly less perverse, intellectual ability began to matter less and less, thus ending the need for such testing.

What matters now, is how much you can contribute to the decline of the American Empire.

Thus the “Adversity Score” was born, from the same Jewish mind that gave you “Common Core“.

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

The College Board is a New York-based non-profit that is in charge of overseeing the SAT. Like everything else that is not explicitly hostile to Leftists, it was eventually taken over by communists, and turned to communist aims. This new “adversity score” number is calculated by assessing 15 factors, purportedly to help admissions officers determine an individual student’s social and economic background. These factors are first divided into three categories: neighborhood environment, family environment and high school environment.

Each of the three categories has five sub-indicators that are indexed in calculating each student’s adversity score. Neighborhood environment will take into account crime rate, poverty rate, housing values and vacancy rate. Family environment will assess what the median income is of where the student’s family is from; whether the student is from a single parent household; the educational level of the parents; and whether English is a second language. High school environment will look at factors such as curriculum rigor, free-lunch rate and AP class opportunities. Together these factors will calculate an individual’s adversity score on a scale of one to 100. A score of 50 is considered “average.” Anything above 50 proves “hardship” while anything below 50 is considered “privilege.”

Coleman, the Jew who came up with this garbage, insists the new dimension of scoring will not take race into consideration, but we all know what this is. Blacks, due to their genetically imposed IQ deficiency, score lower on tests than do Whites. This performance gap leads Whites to better success in life than blacks, and so the Jews are trying desperately to drag Whites down to the level of negroes, for their own sick amusement.

This is one the most blatant example of racial IQ disparities emerging as central to an issue of public interest, and the Jews trying desperately to cover it up. Nobody with a career to protect dares to say what it is, for fear of those same Jews.

Last night’s episode of Tucker Carlson Tonight may have been one of the best yet. He must have been feeling pretty good about turning 50. (Happy Birthday, Tucker!)

He had Heather Mac Donald, author of The Diversity Delusion, as his guest last night to discuss this issue, and the dance they both engaged in was a lesson in edginess which I stood in awe of.

Tucker begins the segment with a monologue describing the basic characteristics similarly to how I’ve done here, carefully neglecting to mention the ethnic background of Coleman, instead referring to him as a “Left wing social engineer”.

Tucker describes the purpose of the SAT as being the exact opposite of the new “adversity score” regime. To provide a fair and level playing field on which students are judged by merit.

Predictably, racial disparities emerge in this, for unchangeable reasons originating in genetics. Since Tucker Carlson cannot say this on Fox News, he instead says “Nobody thought the SAT was going to make everyone the same. That’s impossible, people are not the same. Some people have natural advantages, including on standardized tests, and always will. You can’t change that, unfortunately, any more than you can make anyone tall enough to play in the NBA.”

This is especially telling, since Tucker is surely aware of the work of Charles Murray on the subject of Race & IQ. Tucker was mentioned by name in Murray’s book “The Bell Curve” and Tucker has spoken positively about Murray on his show before, most notably in the wake of Murray being chased off a college campus by violent communist agitators. He described Murray as “one of the great living sociologists in America” as he introduced Murray as a guest on the program, and they briefly discussed his books, without mentioning the specifics of the content.

Equating SAT scores to height and athletic ability is the acknowledgement of the genetic origins of intellectual ability. Mentioning the NBA specifically, carefully calls attention to the fact that nobody is concerned about racial disparities where they cause blacks to dominate, such as in basketball.

Moving on, Tucker says “It doesn’t take a perfect SAT score to guess who’s going to lose under the system. It’s who always loses…” At which point Radical Agenda listeners say “White males” during the brief pause, and then Tucker skillfully avoids this implication by saying “The middle class”.

“They’ve been told, America is a meritocracy” he says of “the middle class”. But parenthetical “people like David Coleman know, that’s not true. They know it because they make the rules. They benefit from the corruption of the system”

If you think Tucker is completely naive of the concerns raised by anti-Semites, then you might assume this was entirely innocent. I suspect Mr. Carlson has endeavored to inform himself of this material, which explains the seething hatred revealed by his tone.

“Wouldn’t it just be easier to reward the kids who know the most about English and math? That’s what you would do if you cared about fairness, or the future of your country. You would emphasize achievement over victimhood. Our decadent elites don’t care, so they do the opposite” Says Carlson, carefully noting how Jews like David Coleman are inherently anti-Nationalistic, and thus unconcerned for the future of the countries they parasite off of.

Tucker introduces Heather Mac Donald, who immediately brings this to the subject of race. “I think what everybody needs to understand, Tucker, is all of this, is driven by the seemingly intractable racial achievement gap. Everything about diversity in our culture, is a surrogate for that problem. ”

To rescue herself from the predictable accusation of being a White Supremacist, she then changes footing to “culture” by saying “If we could close the racial achievement gap, and the way to do that is by changing culture, the whole discourse about diversity would go up in a puff of smoke overnight, and we’d never hear about this pseudo scientific concept again”.

Of course, “culture” in this instance, is a pseudo scientific proxy for mentioning race. Blacks are not failing in school and life because they have bad taste in music, they have bad taste in music for the same reasons they fail to measure up to Whites, because they are savage creatures who are unfit from birth, for White forms, and standards of achievement.

Bringing it back to race, Mac Donald then goes to a subject which recently made a high profile libertarian the target of the Jewish mob. She mentions “We see every year in New York City, that Asian kids from poor immigrant backgrounds, whoop everybody’s ass, regardless of their income levels.”

Asians, as every Radical Agenda listener knows, have higher average IQs than do Whites, which is why they do so well in school and life. Even as poor immigrants who often spend their childhood years in their parents’ restaurants, they always advance within a generation because they are fit to, unlike their darker counterparts.

However, as the author of a book attacking the “diversity delusion” Mac Donald is surely conscious of the terrible fait which the Jews will visit upon anyone who dare mention the genetic component of this reality. So she goes on to say “because their families, their parents, are so relentlessly focused on their student’s academic involvement. That is what is necessary to close the academic achievement gap. And until you get rid of the ‘acting white syndrome’ that stigmatizes academic achievement on the part of black students, unless we get rid of the preferences that black students know about, that sends the message that they don’t need to work as hard in order to get admitted to highly selective schools over their non-student of color peers, with better scores, we’re not going to close that academic achievement gap, and we’re going to be saddled with this scourge of diversity, which is simply a way to dismantle precisely the colorblind meritocratic standards that are a key to any society’s success”.

Of course, this is patently absurd and Mac Donald and Carlson both know it. Asians are not advancing through education and the professional world because their parents are invested in their studies, anymore than blacks are dominating in the NBA because their loving and ever present fathers were very good athletic coaches. Blacks scoff at academic achievement for the same reason Aesop’s fox called the grapes sour, they are hopelessly out of his reach. Jews are promoting blacks through credentialing , in order to undermine the legitimacy of our institutions and diminish the ability of White men to stand against their tyranny.

Failure to act on that obvious reality, is how we got our “colorblind meritocratic standards” that allowed Jews the power to do this. Until we recognize the threat they pose, and exclude them from such avenues of influence in our societies, we will decline ever more rapidly into the muddy filth of the diversity regime, until there is not a blond hair left on this Earth.

Tucker ends the segment with one of his signature Jewish questions, asking how David Coleman, who has led a life of privilege typical of American Jews “how can someone like that, bring that to us with a straight face, and act as if it’s legitimate, because it’s not”

Mac Donald filibusters, as is typical of our Tucker Carlson’s Jewish Questions bit, complaining about the “excuse making grievance industry” and saying this is “simply what you would expect from anybody involved in higher education in this country”.

But of course, David Coleman is not just anyone involved in higher education. He is a Jew. A Jew who has been praised on the pages of as being “at the heart of the latest culture wars, entangled in the struggle between conservatives and liberals over the role of government in education reform,” for his tireless efforts to drag America into the Abyss.


There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls…

Join us this and every Monday, and Friday from 5-7pm Eastern, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda. It’s a show about timeless ideas, the news of the day, and whatever is on your mind at  323-9-AGENDA

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

MRP.insert({ 'url':'', 'lang':'auto', 'codec':'mp3', 'volume':60, 'introurl':'', 'fallback':'', 'radiotype':'icecast', 'autoplay':false, 'jsevents':false, 'buffering':5, 'title':'Radical Agendas ', 'welcome':'Radical Agendas Radio Network', 'bgcolor':'#343434', 'wmode':'transparent', 'skin':'mcclean', 'width':180, 'height':60 });

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at


This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 

Become an Premium Member! Shop At! Like my voice? Hire me to read the text of your choice at



iFrame is not supported!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S05E036 – Adversity Score appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 198 | War or No War

Fri, 2019-05-17 11:43 +0000

Donald Trump tells Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan that he doesn’t want a war with Iran, but actions speak louder than words.

A war with Iran is exactly what he’s going to get if he doesn’t reign in his National Security Adviser, and the mainstream media is already gearing up for the return of the anti-war left.

Also: The Kushner-Miller immigration proposal was announced yesterday.

I’ve got all the latest!

This is EPISODE 198 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 198 | War or No War appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 197 | Blissful Ignorance

Thu, 2019-05-16 11:16 +0000

Are you sitting down?

We have new numbers that show only two in fifteen Americans are aware of the fact that one hundred thousand illegal migrants are apprehended at the border each and every month.

Most Americans apparently think the number of monthly apprehensions is south of ten thousand. Upon learning the REAL statistics, 52% support Trump’s national emergency order. No word yet on why the other 48% are brain dead.

Must be nice to be able to ignore this problem, but they’re in for a rude awakening!

We’ll also be talking about Iran and Venezuela since American intervention in those countries will probably be used by Democrats as justification for more mass migration at some point in the near future.

This is EPISODE 197 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 197 | Blissful Ignorance appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Telegram is the New Gab

Thu, 2019-05-16 06:04 +0000

Telegram is a popular instant messaging app which uses proprietary encryption. In other words, it provides a somewhat uncertain layer of security to the conversations which take place within it. In my book, the smooth and reliable functioning of the app makes it a great balance of security and convenience for casual conversation. For many people, this all but replaces their text messaging app.

Telegram is the New Gab

It is also emerging as a popular alternative social media platform, as figures so tame as Laura Loomer and Milo Yiannopoulos are getting banned from the major social platforms. Not to mention Gab’s heavy handed approach to violations of their comparatively few prohibitions. is hardly any alternative, since they assign an “explicit” flag to accounts such as mine, and this prevents people from seeing your posts without going through an extra step in their settings, which amounts to a censorship by default.

The only people I’ve ever heard of getting banned from Telegram on the other hand, are literal ISIS accounts, and considerable attempts to deplatform us from there have already failed.

It’s also run by a Russian company, so there’s that.

If you don’t already have a Telegram account, you’ll have to give them a cell phone number to get it. Some people find that troubling, but from a moderator’s perspective, this is very helpful in that it imposes a cost for creating fake accounts, which just can’t be beat in a free app. It makes keeping the chat free of trolls and spam a lot easier, and we have a pretty good time on there.

Regular chats go through Telegram’s servers, but you do have the option of opening “Secret Chats” for more secure, end to end encrypted communications. You can use it to transfer any type of file, and MP3 audio and MP4 (as well as other formats of) video will play within the app. You can also make voice calls calls, and record voice and video messages.

The group feature allows you to chat with other listeners, and we have a public one which you can join at

Alternatively, you can follow my Telegram channel, which is a one way broadcast of my posts without anybody else talking. This will generate far fewer notifications on your phone than the chat will, which most people end up muting notifications to their phone on. I’d suggest joining both, and leaving notifications on for my channel at

I’m going to start uploading old Radical Agenda video clips to my channel pretty soon, so be sure and subscribe for some laughs and memories.

Telegram is available for Windows, Android, iPhone, Linux, and can be run straight from your web browser. Get Telegram here if you don’t already have it installed

Please keep in mind that anybody can join these groups, so don’t say anything you wouldn’t say in public, and always obey the law.

Some other chats and channels you might enjoy;

  • The Outlaw Conservative Fans Group
  • The Monero Enthusiasts Group
  • Trollbox Group
  • The Fashy Girls Channel
  • Milo Yiannopoulos Channel
  • American Politics Channel
  • Alt Right Shitlords Inc. Channel
  • Trump TV Channel

You can find other groups and channels by searching at

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Telegram is the New Gab appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Outlaw Conservative S01E018 – Raise My Taxes

Wed, 2019-05-15 18:03 +0000

As one who was once enamored with libertarianism, I find it difficult to believe I end up being the guy arguing against free trade, and in favor of new taxes. I’m also a guy who is surrounded by inexpensive electronics, almost all of which were surely manufactured in another country. So cheering on the President while he makes my tools and toys more expensive, feels weird to say the least of it.

Even as I drifted rightward ideologically, I still thought free trade was ideal for a long time. In my first Vice News interview, Elle Reeve asked me about trade and I told her I disagreed with most of the Alt Right on the subject. I like the quote commonly attributed to Bastiat which goes “When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will”. Ron Paul told me economic sanctions were a reliable prelude to war, and I believed it.

The Trump presidency has given me a profound appreciation for contemplating trade policy. I’m made to recall a BBS game, back when there was no Internet and we just called one another’s computers over the phone line, called TradeWars. I had never gotten into it back then, but I can see now why it was so popular, since I now view trade policy as an exciting exercise in strategic thinking, as opposed to a tedious mathematical equation.

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

The phrase “trade war” was all over the news beginning with the Republican presidential primary, and has grown louder and louder in recent months. Thinking of trade as a competition amongst nations, made sense to me as a free trader. “May the best man win” was my attitude, confident that in a fair competition, my country would dominate. Altering the playing field through public policy, to accomplish higher purposes than a quick buck, was an element of strategy in that competition which I had never really contemplated very deeply before.

Free trade is a fine default position, from which to contemplate other possibilities. “What would actual free trade orthodoxy dictate here? What deviations from that standard exist in the system? How can we alter our public policy to offset the negative impacts of some other nation’s trade policy?” Those are questions which might be asked by a reasonable free trader. As I began to contemplate Trump’s trade proposals, I looked at things from this perspective myself. If some country was charging tariffs on US exports, I figured we could, and should, retaliate with our own tariffs, but only as a means by which to compel that country to break down their barriers to trade.

The unreasonable free trader insists on unilateral free trade. He adheres to an absurd orthodoxy which cannot stand up to scrutiny, unless he dare confess a willingness to see the impoverishment of himself, his neighbors, and his offspring. If Mexico wants to charge a 15% tariff on imports from the United States, fine with him, we can’t retaliate with our own tariff. If the Chinese subsidize cheap goods and dump them on our shores for no other purpose than to put American companies out of business, fine with him too. What matters to him is the correctness of his position, rather than the outcome of any particular policy, or lack thereof. I had previously been in this camp myself, before having my beliefs challenged in the lead up to the 2016 Presidential election.

As I watched the debate over trade policy unfold, I discovered a whole new dimension of domestic and foreign policy. A high stakes strategy game, with infinite possibilities.

The (possibly misattributed) Bastiat quote, and Ron Paul’s concerns about foreign relations still remain at the forefront of my considerations, but if trade policy can result in martial conflict, this is a reason to consider it carefully, and act decisively, rather than to unilaterally disarm. If trade policy can be viewed as a military provocation, it only stands to reason that my country should answer such provocations by making them costly and thus undesirable. For the same reasons, it is likewise insane to think that we ought to have unmitigated trade relations with adversarial nations.

Pat Buchanan has a column out yesterday, titled Tariffs — The Taxes That Made America Great, which I plan to read on air today. Going all the way back to 1789, he outlines a rich history of American economic nationalism. From the earliest days of our constitution, tariffs were the revenue mechanism of choice for the federal government. Not so much because it was the most lucrative, as much as to promote “the encouragement and protection of manufactures.”

To hear the cult of free trade tell it, trade policy is incapable of encouraging anything but graft, corruption, war, and economic catastrophe. So why did George Washington set our young republic down this course?

As it turns out, things aren’t so simple.

What first made me consider these implications was a moment during the Presidential debates of 2016. Then candidate Trump pointed out that Mexico was imposing a 15% tariff on US exports, yet the United States had no reciprocal barrier to Mexican exports. This was going on while we were supposedly in a “Free Trade Agreement” with that country, commonly known as NAFTA.

Mexico obviously benefits from the ability to sell products to the United States far more than the United States benefits from the ability to sell products to Mexico. If one wanted a world free of trade barriers, it would stand to reason that the United States ought to apply some sort of pressure to compel Mexico to change their policy, and a tariff on Mexican exports could surely accomplish this. Canada too, also in the midst of the North American “Free Trade” Agreement, had an astronomical tariff on US dairy exports. Again, even from the perspective of a free trade advocate, why would the United States do nothing to rectify this barrier?

For that matter, if free trade was universally beneficial, as we’ve been told by both parties for what seems like an eternity, why would these countries harm their own economies by imposing these tariffs?

What becomes obvious when one looks into it in some depth, without the blinders of ideology, is that these policies exist for good reason.

Mexico wants to build up their own industrial base, and so while exports are helpful to this pursuit, imports are detrimental to it. So they’ll preach the wisdom of free trade when they want access to markets, but apply a decidedly different standard when it comes to their own trade policies. Competition from American dairy farmers would harm Canada’s dairy industry, and so to keep that industry thriving domestically, they make dairy imports from the United States prohibitively expensive.

As the Trump administration imposed tariffs on steel, American steel manufacturing, an industry once gone from our country, exploded. Steel production is important for a lot more than a Nation’s GDP stats. This is a military necessity, and if we are dependent on foreign countries for our steel, then we had best hope we never find ourselves in conflict with those countries on whom we depend.

With tariffs being imposed on Chinese exports, what other industries might take root in the United States? Could we begin making our own computers? Our own smartphones? In an age of information, where so much vital knowledge is passed through our electronic devices, is that not likewise a national security issue? How can we even contemplate security, when a foreign country, under the rule of the Communist Party, no less, manufactures all the devices on which we communicate?

To see so many of my fellow conservatives go into kneejerk conniptions about “socialism” whenever any sort of economic intervention is contemplated, is a sad sight indeed. Especially while those same conservatives are simultaneously suckered into the neverending foreign policy disasters of the same neocon element that pushes free trade. To them, America is to be always at war, and yet open to any human, material, or informational penetration. The world is supposedly some terrible place, replete with monsters to slay in every corner of the Earth, and yet as we go around the world confronting every real and imagined danger, every man, woman, child, product, service, and bit of propaganda can flow freely to and fro across our unsecured border.

Our economy declines, our birthrates follow, and instead of changing course, we replace our industry with imports, and our population with immigrants who can never hope to maintain what we have built. This state of affairs can only describe a nation on its death bed, and yet we have the cure for this otherwise terminal illness, sitting right beside us on the night table.


Want to share this post on Facebook, or in polite company? Share if from!


Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

I’m looking forward to hearing from you at 808-4-Outlaw, and the more you talk the less I have to, so please do give us a call.

Join us, this and every Wednesday from 5-7pm US Eastern time for another exciting episode of Outlaw Conservative!

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

MRP.insert({ 'url':'', 'lang':'auto', 'codec':'mp3', 'volume':60, 'introurl':'', 'fallback':'', 'radiotype':'icecast', 'autoplay':false, 'jsevents':false, 'buffering':5, 'title':'Radical Agendas ', 'welcome':'Radical Agendas Radio Network', 'bgcolor':'#343434', 'wmode':'transparent', 'skin':'mcclean', 'width':180, 'height':60 });

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at

Become an Outlaw Conservative premium member today to support this production, and get access to members only perks! Donate to the production of Outlaw Conservative using your credit or debit card at Shop At

This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. I sell shirts, hats, mousepads, and other cool stuff, though sadly, we can only accept cryptocurrency. Or you can just fork over money by donating.


iFrame is not supported!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Outlaw Conservative S01E018 – Raise My Taxes appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 196 | The War on Babies

Wed, 2019-05-15 11:39 +0000

Imagine having an ideology that simultaneously rejects morality while emphasizing infanticide as a moral imperative.

That’s the current state of the left today. They would rather attack and murder the defenseless than face the consequences of their own decisions. It’s all very interesting given that population decline is their main argument for mass migration.

Some states have had enough. Alabama just passed the strongest abortion laws in the country in a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade. Other states are just getting warmed up. Maine just passed taxpayer funded abortion and mandated that all private health insurance providers offer infanticide as a covered service.

I’ve got all the latest, as well as your daily foreign policy coverage.

This is EPISODE 196 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 196 | The War on Babies appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

PodZeen 68 – Game of Boners

Tue, 2019-05-14 23:15 +0000

Nick and Kiz from Monday Night Shitpost join us for another very special episode… Enjoy!

  • Slo-mo shlomo
  • Girls of Porn – Mr Bungle
  • Pick vs Fingerstyle
  • Laura Loomer oh gawd
  • Heartiste got ZUCKED HARDCORE
  • Sex for Homework – Mindless Self Indulgence
  • Crazed boomer drone strikes Ariana Grande with swastikas
  • Not Promised Tomorrow, Open Season – Stuck Mojo
  • Feminism roasts innocents
  • Program the NPCs
  • The Tyrone Affair
  • PodZeen No-Porn Challenge
  • The Final Countdown – Death Strike
  • The Final Countdown – Kazookeylele cover
  • Tetrastructural Minds – Vektor
  • Xenochrist – Alex Rudinger/The Faceless
  • I Gotsta Get Paid – ZZ Top
  • One More Day – Mushroomhead
  • Permanent N Word Pass
  • Violent Pornography – System of a Down
  • Safety Word – Telepathic Sandwich



BUY OUR MERCH – http://www.Obzeen.Rocks/shop/

DONATE – http://www.Obzeen.Rocks/donate/


SUBSCRIBE on iTunes –

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post PodZeen 68 – Game of Boners appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 195 | Never Surrender

Tue, 2019-05-14 11:36 +0000

These days, it seems like the whole world has learned a valuable lesson from how the United States handled Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gadaffi.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has joined the ranks of world leaders like Nicolas Maduro and Hassan Rouhani who refuse to capitulate or surrender to the demands of the globalist elite who control the international banking system.

The trade war between the United States and China has escalated to the point where Xi Jingping may now be threatening to dump U.S. Treasuries — a move that could deal a crippling blow to the dollar’s status as international reserve currency.

I’ve got all the latest!

This is EPISODE 195 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 195 | Never Surrender appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Radical Agenda S05E035 – Politicized

Mon, 2019-05-13 18:51 +0000

Previously on the Radical Agenda, we discussed a sudden shift in jurisprudence during the FDR administration, often referred to as the “switch in time that saved nine”. This was in response to a Leftist plot to pack the Supreme Court, in which the court decided to approve some New Deal measures previously understood to be unconstitutional, on the hopes that it would prevent this court packing scheme from coming to fruition.

Courts are of course, in theory, supposed to be above politics. That is why Supreme Court justices are given lifetime appointments, so that they need not concern themselves with the popularity of their decisions. For over a century, this seemed to be working out pretty well.

Under FDR, this changed. Leftists being the cunning manipulators they are, with their limitless willingness to lie, cheat, steal, and coerce, found a way to intimidate judges, and by this mechanism, got their way in defiance of the US Constitution. They did not soon forget the lesson learned. Conservatives, sadly, did.

Radical Agenda S05E035 – Politicized

Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court was not, as those on the Left would like to pretend, some kind of power grab by the far Right. Kavanaugh worked for the Bush administration, and was a gift by Trump to the establishment wing of the Republican Party. This concession was met, not with reciprocal deference and cooperation by the Left, but rather with an unprecedented wave of calumnies, which included false rape accusations and perjury. Protests against his nomination devolved from expressions of dissatisfaction, to mindless disruptions of the proceedings, and borderline if not outright political violence.

In the wake of his confirmation, Democrat presidential candidates took to the campaign trail to discuss their plans to replicate the FDR court packing scheme. Media organizations and other far Left activist groups, have called for Kavanaugh’s investigation and impeachment. Not because any honest person believes the claims against him, but because his confirmation is politically inconvenient.

They didn’t have to prevent Kavanaugh’s confirmation to accomplish the goals of their campaign. Nor do they have to accomplish his impeachment or any other means of removing him from the Court to accomplish the goals of that campaign. All they have to do is apply enough pressure to make him change his behavior, and in this, they seem to have been successful. He has been in the majority more often than any other justice so far this term, often allied with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who is at the ideological center of the current court.

The most noteworthy example was in December of last year, as Kavanaugh joined with the Roberts and the Left in protecting Planned Parenthood’s public funding. This ran in stark contrast to the Left’s hysterics, as they wore “Handmaid’s Tale” costumes to their protests, insisting that Kavanaugh’s confirmation would result in women being enslaved to breed against their will.

Justice Clarence Thomas aptly noted in his dissenting opinion, joined by Alito and Gorsuch, that this was obviously politically motivated.

“So what explains the Court’s refusal to do its job here?,” Thomas wrote. “I suspect it has something to do with the fact that some respondents in these cases are named ‘Planned Parenthood.’”

“Some tenuous connection to a politically fraught issue does not justify abdicating our judicial duty,” Thomas added. “If anything, neutrally applying the law is all the more important when political issues are in the background.”

In a more recent case, a group of consumers had sued Apple, claiming that the company’s monopoly over its App Store led to inflated app prices. Apple disputed the legality of the suit, arguing the consumers had no standing to sue the company because it merely operated an intermediary between users and the developers who make and sell apps. The Supreme Court on Monday said that iPhone users can proceed with the class-action lawsuit. Kavanaugh wrote the opinion for the 5-4 decision, surprising many by breaking with his conservative colleagues and siding with the court’s liberal justices.

Some on the more populist Right may see this as a win for our side, given the tech censorship we’ve faced. I have similar inclinations, but it emerges as part of a pattern where Kavanaugh seems to be siding with the Left in hopes of avoiding their enmity should they regain control over the legislative and executive branches. Whatever the merits of each individual decision, the savvy observer is left to contemplate whether the Left’s pressure tactics are succeeding in altering the outcome of court battles.

But it is not just the courts that have been politicized.

We have seen the intelligence apparatus of the United States turned to Leftist aims. Most notably with the “Russia hoax” being used as an excuse to spy on the Trump campaign, and later to subvert his presidency. Of course, they were politicized well prior to that, as evidenced by bogus intelligence being used to justify the United States carrying out Israeli foreign policy in the Middle East, resulting in thousands of Americans needlessly dying in wars that served no legitimate purpose for the United States, not to mention a ceaseless emptying of our treasury on such fruitless pursuits.

We have likewise seen the law enforcement apparatus turned to explicitly political purposes. Both with the Mueller probe that followed this politicized intelligence operation, and with the prosecutions, and lack thereof, that ensued after the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville in 2017. Nobody saw fit to go after the Clinton campaign for openly admitting to paying Russian sources for the “Steel Dossier”, even as the investigation vigorously pursued any connection between Trump and Russia. Likewise, nobody saw fit to prosecute any of the Left wing terrorism that was openly bragged about in Charlottesville, even as the FBI and local authorities relentlessly hunted down Right wingers who defended themselves against that terrorism.

Libertarian notions as to what motivates businessmen were likewise blown out of the water, as the tech and financial sectors mutually conspired to silence Right wing voices, first at the fringes, then moving ever more reliably toward the center. No profit motive could be found in these pursuits, as the politicization of their businesses has only sacrificed credibility with the broader public, chased away users, who are ultimately their products, and even caused them to turn away money from advertising sales that went against their political motivations.

The Left can do this of course, because they have no fear that the Right would ever replicate the behavior. We would view the use of our intelligence and law enforcement apparatus as a corrupt act, and so we would not do it. We attempt to draw a line of separation between politics and the market, and so we are not inclined to boycotts, or turning away business, over political disagreements.

Noble though these inclinations my be, we are sacrificing political advantage as a result. Same as we have with the use of criminal violence. The Left has politicized everything from the media, to the courts, to the intelligence agencies, to law enforcement, to business, right down to the criminal element. Meanwhile, the Right has attempted to play by decidedly outdated rules. We tend to view the political realm as a gentleman’s contest, where we abide by certain rules, even if it causes us to lose. This is an impossible worldview to maintain, once one has opened participation in their political system to hostile elements, who do not care for such gentlemanly standards.


There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls…

Join us this and every Monday, and Friday from 5-7pm Eastern, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda. It’s a show about timeless ideas, the news of the day, and whatever is on your mind at  323-9-AGENDA

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

MRP.insert({ 'url':'', 'lang':'auto', 'codec':'mp3', 'volume':60, 'introurl':'', 'fallback':'', 'radiotype':'icecast', 'autoplay':false, 'jsevents':false, 'buffering':5, 'title':'Radical Agendas ', 'welcome':'Radical Agendas Radio Network', 'bgcolor':'#343434', 'wmode':'transparent', 'skin':'mcclean', 'width':180, 'height':60 });

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at


This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 

Become an Premium Member! Shop At! Like my voice? Hire me to read the text of your choice at  Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S05E035 – Politicized appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 194 | Guardians of the Fallacy

Mon, 2019-05-13 11:43 +0000

Facebook’s senior leadership team is the group of corporate activists that no one asked for or wanted.

Without the wisdom of their careful guidance or their army of content moderators, the public would be exposed to DANGEROUS ideas like… opposition to infanticide (which leads to the legalization of rape, as we all know). Yes, the only thing standing between the public and TRULY VIOLENT IDEAS like the biological reality that there are only two genders is Facebook’s team of benevolent censures.

If not for them, it might become readily apparent that “the emperor has no clothes”; that the cult of intersectionality is nothing more than anti-white crybullying.

We’ll be talking about the recent round of censorship before moving into discussion about foreign and monetary policy.

This is EPISODE 194 of So to Speak w/ Jared Howe!

 Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post S o T o S p e a k | Ep. 194 | Guardians of the Fallacy appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

Radical Agenda S05E034 – Constitutional Crises

Fri, 2019-05-10 17:22 +0000

If you think Clown World is a mess, imagine you’re Ron Paul right now.

You turn on the TV for your daily dose of Jewish nonsense, and you see Nancy Pelosi, of all people, talking about a “Constitutional Crisis”.

Her concerns are echoed, pun intended, by (((Jerry Nadler))).

You change the channel in disbelief, but everywhere you go, there’s a Democrat saying the same thing. Constitutional Crisis, Constitutional Crisis, Constitutional Crisis, and you think this would make more sense if it were some kind of deathbed confession. It’s almost as if the Democrat Party had finally decided to read the damn thing, and suddenly felt guilty about destroying the country for all these decades.

But of course, no such luck.

Radical Agenda S05E034 – Constitutional Crises

They aren’t feeling guilty about taking your guns away, or stifling your speech. They have no qualms about launching a counterintelligence operation against the now sitting President using the secret courts of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. They haven’t renounced their use of illegal immigration to alter the electoral college or the makeup of the House of Representatives. They haven’t come to grasp the meaning of the “general welfare” clause, and given up on wealth redistribution. They certainly haven’t stumbled upon the 10th Amendment and embraced the wisdom of states rights.

No, none of these eminently reasonable things have sparked the Democrat Party’s newfound interest in the Constitution of the United States.

Rather, they are complaining that Attorney General William Barr has not broken the law by releasing the unredacted Mueller report to the public, and have thus voted in committee to hold Barr in contempt of Congress. The matter will soon go before the floor of the House of Representatives for a full vote. The House being in Democrat hands, the measure is likely to pass.

Once approved, Pelosi, as House speaker then turns the matter over to the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, “whose duty it shall be to bring the matter before the grand jury for its action,” according to the law. The Justice Department has to actually make the choice to take up a criminal case against someone, however, and in the past, the Justice Department has declined to prosecute criminal contempt of Congress cases. The current US Attorney for DC is Jessie Kong Liu, who was appointed by Trump in 2017, and like the rest of the Justice Department, is under his authority. So this route of presidential harassment is less than likely to bear fruit.

It is worth noting, of course, that Representative Nadler is more than welcome to go stop by the AG’s office and view the unredacted report at his leisure. This isn’t something that is being kept secret from him. He just doesn’t want to make the effort, and this means of review would not be nearly as helpful toward his blatantly obvious political motives.

While Congress has broad investigative powers, there are of course limits. The Supreme Court has said that congressional inquiries should have a “legitimate legislative purpose” and has explicitly stated that they should not be used for political purposes, or to embarrass, expose wrongdoing, or target a particular person or group.

Given Nancy Pelosi’s prior statements about subpoena power being an “interesting … arrow to have in your quiver in terms of negotiating on other subjects”, the motives here could not be more obvious. Add to this, Representative Al Green on MSNBC earlier this week, saying he fears that if Democrats don’t impeach Trump, he’ll be reelected, which of course, is what this is all about.

The White House, for their part, has invoked Executive Privilege over the material in the report, blocking further access to it.

Executive privilege, as you may be aware, is the power of the President and other members of the executive branch, to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government, in pursuit of information or personnel relating to confidential communications that would impair proper function of their offices. The power of Congress or the federal courts to obtain such information is not mentioned explicitly in the Constitution, nor is there any explicit mention in the Constitution of an executive privilege to resist such requests from Congress or the courts. Both are seen as “inherent” to the powers of the respective branches.

Historically conflicts between these competing powers has been handled through negotiation, rather than allowing the courts to decide. In this case, since the Democrats have taken it upon themselves to resist the Trump administration in every imaginable way, and a few which were previously beyond imagination, negotiation seems unlikely. The Democrats are thus left with the choice of whining about it impotently, or taking the matter to the Supreme Court, where the conservative majority is likely to side with the President, as would any liberal majority if liberals had any kind of standards beyond their own pursuit of power.

Hence the “Constitutional Crisis” could best be summarized as “the constitution doesn’t give the Democrats what they want”.

The impudence of the Left in this incident comes as no surprise to the savvy observer. Nancy Pelosi was unconcerned about the Constitution as she threatened that a future Democrat President might use his emergency powers to infringe on the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans. There is nothing in Article 1 Section 8 that would empower the Congress to ban fossil fuels, or any of the other lunacy contemplated in the “Green New Deal” nor for that matter, any power to enact the Affordable Care Act, or 90% of the other crap that gets crammed through each legislative session, by both parties. That, dear listener, is the real constitutional crisis.

Once upon a time, Congress understood limits on their powers. To enact alcohol prohibition, as the easiest example, Congress was well aware they had no such power, and thus the 18th amendment to the Constitution was necessary to send booze underground. Likewise, to end prohibition, Congress knew they lacked the authority to repeal a constitutional amendment on their own, and thus the 21st amendment was passed. Since then, Congressional restraint has been in steady decline.

I am not making a defense of drugs or advocating their legalization to say, that the example of alcohol prohibition makes it plain to see that Congress lacked the authority to ban drugs. This of course did not stop them from doing so. Nor did it stop them from empowering the Drug Enforcement Agency to ban substances at their discretion, without even Congressional say so, under the “Emergency Scheduling” powers in the Comprehensive Crime Control act of 1984.

Indeed, it would take an eternity to list the many examples of Congress exceeding their authority, so it might make more sense to address some landmark Supreme Court Decisions.

Take for example the incident historians sometimes refer to as the “switch in time that saved nine“. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, whom even conservative Americans foolishly and universally hail as a great President for defeating the Nazis, was on quite the run trying to convert our Nation to communism with his New Deal programs. Fortunately for you and I, the Supreme Court had the good sense to strike down most of these measures as unconstitutional.

Roosevelt and his Democrat controlled Congress saw this impedance of their coercive powers as its own constitutional crisis. In response, they formulated the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937. This was to alter the Judiciary Act of 1869, in which Congress had established that the United States Supreme Court would consist of the Chief Justice and eight associate justices. Roosevelt intended to pack the court with judges who would overlook the constitutional challenges to his programs, a measure Democrats openly contemplate on the Presidential campaign trail even today.

This resulted in a sudden jurisprudential shift by Associate Supreme Court Justice Owen Roberts, in the 1937 case West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish. The Court’s majority opinion was rightly seen as a strategic political move, to undermine the court packing plan. It worked, and thus you still see a Supreme Court of 9 Justices, at least until Democrats regain control over Congress and the White House. Unfortunately, this is also how you ended up with a federal minimum wage, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and all manner of other redistributive schemes as the Lochner era came to an abrupt and unjustifiable end.

It likewise paved the way another notable case known as Wickard v. Filburn in 1942. An Ohio farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat to feed animals on his own farm. The US government had established limits on wheat production, supposedly to stabilize wheat prices. Filburn grew more than the limits that he was permitted and so was ordered to pay a penalty. In response, he said that because his wheat was not sold, it could not be regulated as commerce, let alone “interstate” commerce, referencing the “interstate commerce clause” which grants congress the power “to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”

The Supreme Court disagreed, stating in the majority decision “even if appellee’s activity be local and though it may not be regarded as commerce, it may still, whatever its nature, be reached by Congress if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce and this irrespective of whether such effect is what might at some earlier time have been defined as ‘direct’ or ‘indirect.'”

This dramatically expanded the regulatory powers of the federal government to intervene in basically any matter that might impact the economy in any imaginable way.

You might be saying to yourself “But that would remove all limits on federal powers” and you would be exactly right.

Thomas Jefferson had expressed a similar concern in the earliest days of our then young Constitution.

The interstate commerce clause was one of the congressional power that Congress purported to exercise in creating our first central bank.

In his Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank in 1791, Jefferson was very concerned that the creation of a National Bank would open the floodgates for increased spending by the Federal government. His wisdom seems notably prescient in the current year, does it not? As a national bank was not one of the enumerated powers of the federal government in the constitution, Jefferson was opposed to its formation.

With regard to the interstate commerce clause, Jefferson wrote rather specifically, that to “regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the States, and with the Indian tribes.” did not extend to all economic matters. “To erect a bank, and to regulate commerce, are very different acts. He who erects a bank, creates a subject of commerce in its bills, so does he who makes a bushel of wheat, or digs a dollar out of the mines; yet neither of these persons regulates commerce thereby. To make a thing which may be bought and sold, is not to prescribe regulations for buying and selling. Besides, if this was an exercise of the power of regulating commerce, it would be void, as extending as much to the internal commerce of every State, as to its external. For the power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State, (that is to say of the commerce between citizen and citizen,) which remain exclusively with its own legislature; but to its external commerce only, that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes. Accordingly the bill does not propose the measure as a regulation of trace, but as `’ productive of considerable advantages to trade.

He likewise was skeptical of the excessive reliance on the “general welfare clause” which states that the Congress shall have Power “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States”

Of this Jefferson wrote that “To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless.

It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please.”

The “Bank Bill” was signed into law by George Washington on February 25, 1791, beginning the neverending cascade of constitutional crises we’ve seen ever since, less than two years after the Constitution went into effect.

Thus, it is absurd on its face to see conservatives today fretting over the constitutionality of one matter or another, which would otherwise be to their political advantage. The lid was blown off the whole thing by the first Congress and the first President. The savior they hail for defeating the Germans in World War II, put the final nails in its coffin, and the rapid expansion of federal powers since has been little more than the predictable result of democratic elections.

We have many crises, but they are in no way rooted in the Constitution, no more than most of the laws passed by our Congress. The trouble lies in the quality of our citizenry, and the leaders they subsequently elect.


There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls…

Join us this and every Monday, and Friday from 5-7pm Eastern, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda. It’s a show about timeless ideas, the news of the day, and whatever is on your mind at  323-9-AGENDA

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at


This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 

Become an Premium Member! Shop At! Like my voice? Hire me to read the text of your choice at  Source: Christopher Cantwell

The post Radical Agenda S05E034 – Constitutional Crises appeared first on Christopher Cantwell.

The Manchester Free Press aims to bring together in one place everything that you need to know about what’s happening in the Free State of New Hampshire.




Our friends & allies

New Hampshire

United States

We publish links to the sites listed above in the hopes that they will be useful. The appearance of any particular site in this list does not imply that we endorse everything that the particular site advocates.