Groyper War: Matt Walsh, Minion of Anti-Christ Ben Shapiro, Gets Straight GROYPED

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
November 6, 2019

The Groyper War continues, leaving nothing but the metaphorical bodies of literal scum lining the aisles of university speaking rooms.

Last night, both Daily Wire employee Matt Walsh and Congressman Dan Crenshaw got groyped to hell.

At Dan Crenshaw’s events, they’ve decided to not release any film of them, with the hope that the goyim do not see this evil villain humiliated. The Daily Wire has not yet learned this lesson, and streamed Walsh’s speech and the questions at California State University, Los Angeles last night.

Questions begin at 42:55 in the above professionally-filmed video.

It was every single question except one black guy talking about abortion.

1.) Vince Asks Why Matt Works for an EVIL JEW Who Said Jesus Deserved to Die!

The very first question was from Vincent James from Red Elephants (who is a big supporter of the Groyper War and who you should follow on YouTube).

He came with the CROSS!

Vincent James: Hello, Matt. As a Christian, how do you get past working for someone who originally contributed to shaming the Covington Catholic kids by retweeting left-wing attacks, and called Jesus a “Jewish rebel who tried to lead a revolt against the Romans and got killed for his trouble”?

Matt Walsh: What, you’re telling me that my Jewish boss doesn’t believe that Jesus is the Son of God? I’m scandalized by this, I had no idea. As a Christian, how do I justify working for someone who is not a Christian? Um, I find that to be a total non sequitur.

James: Who blasphemed Christ. That’s my main question.

Walsh: It’s not blasphemy – are you suggesting that everyone who is not Christian is guilty of blasphemy?

James: You are a Christian. And you are working for someone who blasphemed Jesus Christ. He called Him a Jewish rebel who tried to lead a revolt against the Romans and got killed just like other Jewish rebels did. I’m a Christian… he also originally retweeted attacks on the Covington Catholic kids. I’m Catholic.

Walsh: Okay, just to be clear, you’re not going to work for anyone who’s not Christian is what you’re saying?

James: I’m not going to work for someone who publicly states to millions of people –

Walsh: Would you ever work for a non-Christian?

James: Not if they publicly state to millions and millions of people – this was on Joe Rogan – that “Jesus was a Jewish rebel who tried to lead a revolt against the Romans and got killed for his trouble.”

Walsh: I promise, when I get back to the studio, I am going to talk to Ben and tell him “you must be a Christian right now, because that is unacceptable,” I will definitely tell –

James: That’s a straw man, that’s not what I’m saying. I’ve worked for many non-Christians in the past, what I’m saying is –

Walsh: Let me tell you something, I’m gonna talk now, m’kay? Thank you for your question. If you have worked for any non-Christian, then you have worked for people who feel exactly that way about Jesus. Because there are 7 billion people on earth, 5 billion of them are not Christian. All of those 5 billion believe that Jesus was a Jewish rebel – or maybe something else, maybe something worse than that. So that shouldn’t scandalize us, and the idea that we should make employment decisions based on that is totally absurd. Let’s go to the next question, thank you.

As you can see, this answer was rehearsed. Ben Shapiro is not stupid, and he was not going to send one of his stupid goyim out there without an answer to why a person – Ben Shapiro – who claims to support “Judeo-Christianity” – is out there blaspheming Christ.

Here’s that Joe Rogan clip, by the way:

Walsh says that claiming that Jesus was a Jew (blasphemous lie) and tried to lead a revolt against the Romans (blasphemous lie) and got what He deserved (blasphemous lie) is the same thing as not being a Christian (blasphemous lie).

Walsh goes on to make the claim that everyone who is not a Christian believes this.

This is absolute gibberish, and only a Jew could have ever thought of it.

Here is a chart of world religions:

Islam certainly doesn’t say that about Christ – they say He was a prophet.

Atheists don’t usually say that – they will generally say He was a good man who was killed for having strong values against corruption, but just that they don’t believe in the miracles or that He was the son of God.

Hindus and Buddhists, or followers of folk religions, probably don’t have much to say at all about Christ or even know who He is, but would almost certainly not make a point to insult Him or say He deserved to die.

The number of people who would insult Christ every single time and as a matter of course is only that 0.02% of the world that is Jewish, who is also who Matt Walsh works for. If he was employed by any of the other 99.98% of the global population, there is virtually zero chance that that person would be on the record blaspheming Christ.

Furthermore, while I would quit my job as (for example) a mechanic if my boss went around saying such things about Christ, it is much, much different to work for someone who holds this view who works in opinion media and is shaping the ideas of the masses, ostensibly trying to promote a value system, such as is the case with the Daily Wire.

Matt Walsh is going to be in Wisconsin on the 19th (as you can see in our sidebar calendar), and he needs to be further confronted on this issue. I think we might even need to bust out some Talmud verses.

The snake wriggled out of the Covington Catholic kids question as well. We need to hit that one again.

2.) Why Won’t You DEBATE NICHOLAS J. FUENTES????

This guy was fantastic, pushing back until he couldn’t push back no more.

You have to call out their whole “we want debate and conversations” thing as completely fake, and that they’re only about having these stupid fake debates about “socialism” with leftists who are also totally controlled by Jews.

Groyper: I really respect that you said we should not be shutting down any argument by calling people names. I absolutely believe that. Recently, you got into a little bit of a Twitter spat with Nicholas J. Fuentes [crowd applauds]. You went on your show and called him a “punk” and said he became a neo-Nazi to get attention. You said if someone’s arguments are truly bigoted, they should be easier to disprove. So, will you have a conversation with Nicholas J. Fuentes, and if not, isn’t that kinda the same thing you just said we shouldn’t do? Labeling people to shut down conversations?

Walsh: That conversation began, that little back and forth began, because your little buddy, eh, Nick, went on his show or whatever it is, uh, having a uh, tantrum, even though I hadn’t said anything to him. I think what I had done is that I’d actually tweeted that the guy who’d killed a bunch of Mexicans was “a racist piece of shit,” which I stand by. And for some reason, Nick J. Fuentes, that upset him, he didn’t like it. Talk about blasphemy, I was blaspheming a mass shooter. He didn’t like that. And then he went off on a rant, he started calling me homophobic [sic] slurs and he said that I’m a race traitor because I work for Jews. Um. And so on and so forth. And I responded. Do I want to have a debate with him about whether I am those homophobic slurs or whether I’m a race traitor working for Jews? No, I don’t think I need to debate with him. For the same reason I don’t need to debate, you know, a 6-year-old, who’s crying because I took away their lollypop.

Groyper: Isn’t that labeling someone a slur so that you can avoid the debate? You guys could debate any number of things –

Walsh: That’s literally how the debate started, with him labeling me –

Groyper: Now you’re shouting me down.

Walsh: That’s literally – no, you said your piece. That’s literally how the debate started, with him labeling me slurs. Don’t you see that?

Groyper: I mean that may be, but you could debate any host of issues with him, you could debate – I mean, you pick.

Walsh: If someone shouts slurs at me, I’m gonna move on. I don’t feel the need to sit down with them and have some tea and talk more about whether I’m whatever slurs they just expressed.

Groyper: Would you debate serious topics with him, like say, demographics?

Walsh: He’s not interested.

Groyper: Oh, he absolutely would.

Walsh: Okay, great.

Groyper: Like say demographics, immigration, would you debate that with him?

Walsh: Is he capable of having a debate without shouting about the Jews every five seconds?

Groyper: Yes. Absolutely.

Walsh: Well, good for him.

Groyper: Would you be willing to have a debate with him?

Walsh: No, I’m not going to.

Groyper: Isn’t that kinda what you just said you don’t do, shouting people down, refusing the conversation.

Walsh: I’m not shouting him down, I’m … he can absolutely talk about the Jews all he wants, I just have no interest in talking to him.

Groyper: You wouldn’t have to talk about that at all. I feel like these are excuses.

Walsh: Okay. No, it’s just I don’t have to sit down and have a formal debate with every idiot who rants about me online. If I did that, I could never do anything else in my life.

Groyper: Can you see how that would look to some like you’re making excuses to avoid the conversation?

Walsh: I’ve answered your question, thank you.

You can see what he did there.

He is using the Jew thing as a kind of shield. Like he can say “this guy talked about Jews, so I can just dismiss him, because anyone who talks about Jews is evil.”

Welcome to 2019, Matt. Them’s not the rules no more. We have new rules and the rules just keep getting newer.

The more we show that the same people hiding behind “muh sacred chosen ones” are also anti-Christ, pro-gay, anti-debate, anti-freedom, pro-war and so on, the less power the “muh Jews” has with normal people.

These people expose themselves.

Oh and Nick didn’t defend a mass shooter – he attacked Walsh for using the shooting as a chance to condemn white people as evil. There are black mass shootings virtually every day, and he never comes out and talks about “this black piece of shit,” but he was all too happy to jump up and talk about “this white piece of shit.” That was the issue there. I wrote a detailed thing about it, so I won’t repeat that all here.

Furthermore, I just want to comment on Walsh’s attempts to belittle Nick by saying he “has a show or whatever” and that he’s just some idiot ranting on the internet.

Here are Walsh’s numbers for his last few shows:

Here are Nick’s numbers for his last few shows:

Walsh can’t crack 15k views – despite being on a channel with 1.7m subs – while Nick never goes below 60k views – despite only having 57k subs.

Nick is a relevant person who people care about and listen to. Walsh has millions of dollars behind him, and still no one cares about him, other than Groypers who have a bunch of questions and want to have them answered immediately.

3.) Why Can’t We Keep Our Country?

A vet! Great optics. Great question.

Groyper: I am an American whose family has lived here for a long time. I had a grandfather five generations ago serve in the war of 1812. My grandfather served in World War Two, and I just finished up my army service over in Monterey. [Applause]. All of my lineage is European. I think no one in this room would argue that this country, the pioneers, the grit, the imagination, the brilliance it took, was of the European mind. It wasn’t the Indian mind, it wasn’t the Chinese mind, it wasn’t the Japanese hand. It was European.

Walsh: I don’t know what a Chinese mind is, I have to tell you, but – I don’t know what that is. I don’t think minds –

Groyper: No. My question is this: Japan has a right to stay Japan, China has a right to stay China. No one is trying to pick and plug Bangladeshi migrant workers, Indian migrant workers into China, into Japan, and expect them to stay Chinese, to stay Japanese. So my question is – without calling me racist (I don’t think you would do that) – why is it wrong to want to preserve our heritage and keep the country that our ancestors founded European? Why? Why is that wrong? Where is the moral conundrum there?

Walsh: Okay, could I answer your question?  I think in order to have a country, to have a people, there needs to be some unifying foundational thing. Right? And uh, in this country these days, I’m not sure what that unifying thing is and that’s a problem. It’s hard to have a country that way. But I don’t believe that our unifying principle was ever race, skin color, ethnicity – lemme finish – I don’t think that’s what our country ever, and I think in fact that’s what separated our country from every other. Because you can go to every other country on earth pretty much, and find countries that their unifying principle is ethnicity, or religion. I think that for us, our unifying principle was essentially a doctrine. It was a doctrine of human rights. Um, that’s what – did I just, did my mic go up? It didn’t? Okay. Anyway. Okay. I can continue. I’m uh, I think our uh, unifying principle is that doctrine, that set of ideas, and so when I talk about our country not being a country anymore, which I do feel that way, it’s because we don’t have that shared set of values and ideas anymore. Even something as simple as believing in human rights, okay, I think that is foundational to our country. But I also believe that a lot of people don’t believe in that anymore and so that’s what makes it difficult for us to have a country.

Groyper: My specific question was: why would it be immoral for me to want to preserve my European heritage? I didn’t say “do you think we should?”, I said “why would it be immoral?”

Walsh: I think it is un-American is what I would say.

Groyper: But why would it be immoral?

Walsh: I think it’s un-American.

Groyper: But that’s not what I’m asking.

(cross-talk)

Walsh: I’m not gonna try to get into your heart and your soul and find out what’s going on there. What I’m saying is: I don’t think it’s American. I think it’s flawed –

Groyper: Why is it immoral for us to want to preserve our European heritage?

Walsh: I guess it would really depend on what motivates that, and if you’re saying it’s not motivated by bigotry, all I can do is trust you on that, I can’t look inside your soul. I think it’s un-American.

Groyper: So it is bigoted of me to want to preserve European heritage?

Walsh: I can’t look inside your soul to tell if you’re a bigot. I mean, it sounds like it, but I don’t know, I don’t know why you want me to do that, I can’t read your mind.

Yikes.

That was absolutely brutal.

Do I even need to comment on that?

Walsh literally said “diversity is our greatest strength, even though our country is falling apart, we are unique this way and if you wanted to be in a country that is unified by a shared identity you should have been born somewhere else, guess that’s just bad luck, pal – and if you disagree then you’re evil.”

As far as this idea that it’s un-American to believe in race – our Founding Fathers literally owned slaves, Walsh.

I mean – come on.

Seriously.

The Constitution says FOR OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY.

He wants us to believe this means we’re supposed to be teaching whatever vague concepts of human rights he’s talking about to Pakistani IT workers?

Who is kidding who here?

How is he going to literally do “diversity is our greatest strength” after literally defending the blasphemy of Christ and saying anyone who disagrees with him is an anti-Semite?

1 tape recording could do this guy’s job.

4.) Anti-White Bias!

Well, another stupid answer to a great question.

Groyper: Do you think modern American society has an anti-white bias, what do you think is causing that, and what do you think we should do to solve this problem?

Walsh: Anti-white bias. Uh, no. I don’t think it comes down to race. I think it comes down mainly to ideas.

According to him then, every other group doing identity politics is doing it… for ideas.

It’s just that that idea is “we want to do what is best for our racial group.”

Thinking emoji.

5.) Hijacked Party?

This guy was not white! Even he’s fed up with this kikery!

It appears that our party has been hijacked by neocons and libertarians who only pay lip service to Evangelical Christians on the social issues and immigration. However, these conservatives only seem to deliver on securing funds for Israel, getting us involved in more wars, bringing in low-skill labor to take away jobs from US citizens while also pushing for corporations to get tax cuts and to decide the wages of the American worker. What should we do regarding this crisis or is this even a crisis to begin with?

Walsh’s answer is not interesting enough for me to type up. He just said blah blah blah should stop illegal immigration.

Just to briefly answer a question some people might have: no, I’m not bothered by there being a few non-whites who agree with us on this stuff. I’m not pushing for a 100% white country necessarily, just a massive white supermajority where whites are at the center of the culture and it is acknowledged that this is first and foremost a white European country and everyone else is a guest who is required to adapt to us.

I also obviously believe in reinstating the anti-miscegenation laws we had in this country up through the 1960s to ensure that there is no racial mixing.

6.) Conservative Drag Queen?

This was a good question, but it was a question for TPUSA.

Within five years of gay marriage being approved, we have drag queen story hour, adults dancing with children in parades naked, decriminalization of AIDS transmission, kids being chemically castrated by the state, men competing in women’s events and Desmond is Amazing going on Good Morning America. In Turning Point USA, Charlie Kirk’s organization, they’ve started to promote pictures with drag queens such as … Lady Maga? Have you seen that? … My question is, how long do you think it will be before Turning Point USA or other conservative organizations start hosting their own conservative drag queen story hours, in other words … how long is it before mainstream conservatism becomes effectively left wing?

The Daily Wire is actually not really hardcore on the promotion of the anal sex stuff like TPUSA is. They are probably the only remaining big conservative institution that isn’t.

However, Michael Knowles, another employee of the Daily Wire, was photographed at Politicon with the tranny in question.

If the question would have included that fact it would have maybe made more sense. As it was, Walsh was able to deflect and say he’s anti-tranny.

7.) G R A N D P A G R O Y P E R

He bears his CROSS! Satan has no power here!

Grandpa Groyper: Welcome to L.A. I agree with everything you say on life, marriage and gender, I agree with your points, but coming from an Italian Catholic perspective, I guess you can call me “Grandpa Groyper.” I’ve been watching some of this stuff. There seems to be a real point of contention between what I would call non-interventionists – in my generation, we were called Ron Paul Republicans. Or going back further, one of my historical heroes is Father Charles E. Coughlin. On the other side you have what I would call very sincere but fanatical pro-Israel Zionists or neocons and they support every war that comes down the pike, and so you have the new mouthpieces of the new neoconism, and not only do they support the Zionist wars but they’re not conservative at all, they support what you’re referring to, the LGBTXYZ and open borders. One last point, I want to ask you: do you agree with my characterization of this conflict between Zionists and non-interventionists and which side are you on? And the second point: the great grandfather of libertarianism, Murray Rothbard, who was a Jewish atheist, he actually supported Dr. David Duke for president, and then Pat Buchanan, so I don’t think there has to be such acrimony and such hatred. As Christians we should be able to communicate with the other side without such acrimony.

Walsh: There shouldn’t be acrimony with the KKK you’re saying? You just said David Duke…

Grandpa Groyper: He hasn’t been in the Klan for 40 years.

Walsh: Good for him … Do I agree with it being so-called Zionists vs – I don’t think that’s how it breaks down at all, I don’t agree with that characterization. I’m not even sure how you work that out personally, because I agree that we have a problem with interventionist wars, and trying to police the world, and I don’t agree with any of that and I’ve been an outspoken critic of that.

Walsh then goes on to say that the idea that these people are loyal to Israel is a conspiracy theory. I guess AIPAC doesn’t exist.

That would be a good followup. We should quote what these people have said at AIPAC to Walsh. Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, etc.

(For the record, name-dropping David Duke is not a pro-level Groyp move. It’s great to have an older guy out there like this. But please try not to name-drop David Duke.)

Remember, he’s back in Wisconsin later this month, and we’ve got other events all month. Check the sidebar for the schedule.

Great job again, Groypers.

What with the new audio leaks, I’m going to have to disavow Nick Fuentes:

But we can go forward without him.

Join the discussion at TGKBBS