The Fall of Michelle Malkin

 

At an alt-right conference running counter to CPAC, called AFPAC, conservative commentator Michelle Malkin fell further down the rabbit-hole:

In this short clip Malkin engages in not just Holocaust denial, but also indiscriminately throws around charges of dual loyalty. It’s part of a trend for Malkin, who also endorsed anti-Semite Paul Nehlen in his contest against Rep. Paul Ryan.

In her opening remarks, Malkin referred to herself as the “Mommy” of the group and thanked the “Groypers,” the alt-right group hosting her, for pushing back against mainstream conservatives.

It’s hard to overstate Malkin’s influence in the conservative media ecosystem; she is the founder of HotAir, Twitchy, and was a mentor to many up-and-comers over the course of her time at the helm of both.

And because of Malkin’s influence, we (as a conservative movement) need to self-reflect about how reflective Malkin’s views are of our movement as a whole. Has Malkin always questioned the number of Jews who died in the Holocaust? Has Malkin always considered Jews to be agents of the Israeli government? How mainstream are the views she’s professing now in the conservative movement? They are uncomfortable questions, but ones we need to be asking as we continue to (rightly) call out the anti-Semitism on the Left with Omar, Tlaib, etc.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 310 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

     

    A lot of people seem to think it’s clear yet they take different meanings.

    Why doesn’t someone with access actually ask Malkin about it instead of all this speculation and accusation?Isn’t she married to a Jewish person? Wouldn’t that make it highly unlikely that she’s antisemitic? Why doesn’t someone with access actually ask Malkin about it instead of all this speculation and accusation?

     

    If someone who knows her well enough can ask her directly, by all means ask. Not knowing her at that level, and knowing what type of audience she is currently engaging with, I think I can judge her comments accordingly.

    Do you know, though? In your comments on this thread you have claimed knowledge of the collective thoughts and motivations of the audience (who you don’t know any better than you know Malkin). From that knowledge of the collective you are comfortable drawing conclusions about this specific person. Isn’t that one of the very tricks that real antisemites, racists, fascists, etc employ in their rhetoric?

    One of her fellow speakers was Patrick Casey, who leads the American Identity Movement (changed from Identity Evropa in 2019). If you choose to associate with white nationalists, I am going to question your association.

    We would not hesitate to condemn a speaker at a Democratic Socialist conference if they engaged in these kind of tropes. We would question the motives of the attendees, and how the speaker is playing on their beliefs. Certainly, I have not met in person the people who attended this conference. The fact that they attended a conference headlined by Nick Fuentes and Patrick Casey does allow me to question their motives and beliefs.

    This is part of the problem that I have with the OP. It was thin on details. I don’t know who Patrick Casey is or Nick Fuentes or what the devil a “goyper” is. With absolutely no background on who anyone involved in this is other than Michelle Malkin. I am not just going to accept as a given that she is an anti-semitic because someone calls her that. 

    Ms. Malkin is a minority woman married to a Jewish husband. I set the bar pretty high to call her a white nationalist or antisemitic. 

    • #91
  2. rgbact Inactive
    rgbact
    @romanblichar

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
     

    “It’s antisemitic to question whatever the precise number is of people who perished in WWII.”

    I think it is clear what statistic she is referring to in that third sentence based on the sentences both before and after it. She is not referring to the death tolls for Stalingrad or Nanjing. She is referring to the Holocaust. Her audience knows this. She is playing for the crowd, using a euphemism.

    Indeed. I didn’t see that quote from her earlier. Clearly winking to the audience of Fuentes and Casey there. Has Fuentes ever mentioned Stalingrad? Does he even know there was a battle there? Again, Michelle’s not anti-semitic……but “dog whistling” really  hard.

    • #92
  3. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Jager (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

     

    A lot of people seem to think it’s clear yet they take different meanings.

    Why doesn’t someone with access actually ask Malkin about it instead of all this speculation and accusation?Isn’t she married to a Jewish person? Wouldn’t that make it highly unlikely that she’s antisemitic? Why doesn’t someone with access actually ask Malkin about it instead of all this speculation and accusation?

     

    If someone who knows her well enough can ask her directly, by all means ask. Not knowing her at that level, and knowing what type of audience she is currently engaging with, I think I can judge her comments accordingly.

    Do you know, though? In your comments on this thread you have claimed knowledge of the collective thoughts and motivations of the audience (who you don’t know any better than you know Malkin). From that knowledge of the collective you are comfortable drawing conclusions about this specific person. Isn’t that one of the very tricks that real antisemites, racists, fascists, etc employ in their rhetoric?

    One of her fellow speakers was Patrick Casey, who leads the American Identity Movement (changed from Identity Evropa in 2019). If you choose to associate with white nationalists, I am going to question your association.

    We would not hesitate to condemn a speaker at a Democratic Socialist conference if they engaged in these kind of tropes. We would question the motives of the attendees, and how the speaker is playing on their beliefs. Certainly, I have not met in person the people who attended this conference. The fact that they attended a conference headlined by Nick Fuentes and Patrick Casey does allow me to question their motives and beliefs.

    This is part of the problem that I have with the OP. It was thin on details. I don’t know who Patrick Casey is or Nick Fuentes or what the devil a “goyper” is. With absolutely no background on who anyone involved in this is other than Michelle Malkin. I am not just going to accept as a given that she is an anti-semitic because someone calls her that.

    Ms. Malkin is a minority woman married to a Jewish husband. I set the bar pretty high to call her a white nationalist or antisemitic.

    Googling Nick Fuentes, Patrick Casey, or Groypers will take you places on the internet that you won’t like to go.  

    • #93
  4. rgbact Inactive
    rgbact
    @romanblichar

    The story is getting more exposure now and condemnations are coming in. Pamela Gellar, David French, David Harsanyi,  Robert Spencer are among the people that have trashed Malkin so far.

    https://www.mediaite.com/politics/conservatives-blast-michelle-malkins-anti-semitic-questions-once-admired-her-this-is-disgusting/

    • #94
  5. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    This strikes me as generally correct, particularly the highlighted portion. It strikes me as quite plausible that true racists, or anti-Semites, do not hide this.

    I don’t know if I can agree with that.

    Fear animates the other side, too. They think they are being dehumanized, vilified, and made a minority in their own country by the importation of people who really are ethno-chauvinists (yes, blacks and Mexicans are ethno-chauvinists). None of these people are going to be ashamed about fighting for their children’s future – who happen to be white, too.

    Heck, just saying “it’s ok to be white” in direct opposition to white guilt and white oppression propaganda is considered racist and white-supremacist.

    So no, I don’t think being proud of protecting your families from current dogma is going to properly define true white supremacy. If they are white supremacists for mild statements like everyone had a right to self determination (16 words! Oh my!) Then I don’t think pride or lack of it is a decent litmus test.

    The arguments need to be dealt with as they are presented. Because right now, as long as they are dismissed as trolling, they will become more entrenched. Why is it ok for Israel to have a wall and not us? Why is it ok for every other race in the world to have their own country but every white country has to open its borders? Why is it ok to dehumanize whites and blame them for all the world’s problems but you point out that wall street is mostly Jews and you are an anti-semite?

    • #95
  6. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Stina (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):
    This strikes me as generally correct, particularly the highlighted portion. It strikes me as quite plausible that true racists, or anti-Semites, do not hide this.

    I don’t know if I can agree with that.

    Fear animates the other side, too. They think they are being dehumanized, vilified, and made a minority in their own country by the importation of people who really are ethno-chauvinists (yes, blacks and Mexicans are ethno-chauvinists). None of these people are going to be ashamed about fighting for their children’s future – who happen to be white, too.

    Heck, just saying “it’s ok to be white” in direct opposition to white guilt and white oppression propaganda is considered racist and white-supremacist.

    So no, I don’t think being proud of protecting your families from current dogma is going to properly define true white supremacy. If they are white supremacists for mild statements like everyone had a right to self determination (16 words! Oh my!) Then I don’t think pride or lack of it is a decent litmus test.

    The arguments need to be dealt with as they are presented. Because right now, as long as they are dismissed as trolling, they will become more entrenched. Why is it ok for Israel to have a wall and not us? Why is it ok for every other race in the world to have their own country but every white country has to open its borders? Why is it ok to dehumanize whites and blame them for all the world’s problems but you point out that wall street is mostly Jews and you are an anti-semite?

    Perhaps we should not play this race game at all? I reject it when it comes from the left and when it comes from the right. Others may be playing it, and try to draw us in, but why should we view the world through an us vs. them dynamic when it comes to race? Can’t we break out of that paradigm?

    • #96
  7. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    Perhaps we should not play this race game at all? I reject it when it comes from the left and when it comes from the right. Others may be playing it, and try to draw us in, but why should we view the world through an us vs. them dynamic when it comes to race? Can’t we break out of that paradigm?

    Lol. Except that’s EXACTLY what the OP did.

    So sure… let’s start with the minorities doing the propaganda. Fyi, by today’s standards, your comment was racist. Ta da, you are a racist, too.

    • #97
  8. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Stina (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    Perhaps we should not play this race game at all? I reject it when it comes from the left and when it comes from the right. Others may be playing it, and try to draw us in, but why should we view the world through an us vs. them dynamic when it comes to race? Can’t we break out of that paradigm?

    Lol. Except that’s EXACTLY what the OP did.

    So sure… let’s start with the minorities doing the propaganda. Fyi, by today’s standards, your comment was racist. Ta da, you are a racist, too.

    The OP identified someone who is playing the antisemitism game in front of an audience sympathetic to white nationalism and antisemitism. 

    Like I said, I reject the tactics of both the far left and the far right when it comes to race. Call me what you will.

    • #98
  9. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    The OP identified someone who is playing the antisemitism game in front of an audience sympathetic to white nationalism and antisemitism.

    No. She didnt.

    Bethany played the anti-Semitism card against someone asking questions that that someone believes are reasonable questions and shared them in front of a crowd that also believes they are reasonable questions.

    And I don’t like the left or the right playing the “race” card in order to get out of addressing arguments.

    All I hear is that these questions aren’t made in good faith. How on earth do you know that? You don’t.

    • #99
  10. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    • #100
  11. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Zafar (View Comment):

    Also – is it possible to be hard on the issue but soft on the person? People see things differently depending on their place in the world; that doesn’t automatically make them right but it should make their sincere perceptions more understandable and relatable.

    Wise words.

    • #101
  12. Ontheleftcoast Inactive
    Ontheleftcoast
    @Ontheleftcoast

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Perhaps we should not play this race game at all? I reject it when it comes from the left and when it comes from the right. Others may be playing it, and try to draw us in, but why should we view the world through an us vs. them dynamic when it comes to race? Can’t we break out of that paradigm?

    •  

    No. Nations and race are historically linked. The only partial recent exception was the mass inculcation of a European Protestant flavored civic religion that was part of public education for immigrants in the US for less than a hundred years. It began to die with “ethnic studies” and the fallout of the Vietnam war.

    The genie is out of the bottle. The US needs basically closed borders and time to come to an equilibrium. Just think of large scale immigration as an invasion. The fact that there is a 5th column in Washington that dominates one political party and has strong influence on the other that wants the invasion makes it worse.

    An invasion? Sometimes it’s obvious:

    Looks like Erdogan is using a move from Fidel Castro’s old playbook

    Reports are coming in that 400 migrant criminals were released from prison on the condition they go to the Greek border to apply for asylum as refugees

    It worked for Castro, now Erdogan might empty his prisons

     

    • #102
  13. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    Is that so? You are playing identity politics.

    • #103
  14. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Ontheleftcoast (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Perhaps we should not play this race game at all? I reject it when it comes from the left and when it comes from the right. Others may be playing it, and try to draw us in, but why should we view the world through an us vs. them dynamic when it comes to race? Can’t we break out of that paradigm?

    •  

    No. Nations and race are historically linked. The only partial recent exception was the mass inculcation of a European Protestant flavored civic religion that was part of public education for immigrants in the US for less than a hundred years. It began to die with “ethnic studies” and the fallout of the Vietnam war.

    The genie is out of the bottle. The US needs basically closed borders and time to come to an equilibrium. Just think of large scale immigration as an invasion. The fact that there is a 5th column in Washington that dominates one political party and has strong influence on the other that wants the invasion makes it worse.

    An invasion? Sometimes it’s obvious:

    Looks like Erdogan is using a move from Fidel Castro’s old playbook

    Reports are coming in that 400 migrant criminals were released from prison on the condition they go to the Greek border to apply for asylum as refugees

    It worked for Castro, now Erdogan might empty his prisons

     

    There is a lot to unpack here. I would just point out that the states of most of the Western hemisphere also have a history of immigration from across the globe. I don’t think we can necessarily capture their experiences, as well as our own, in a classic European nation-state sense. 

    • #104
  15. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Stina (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    Is that so? You are playing identity politics.

    No, I’m not. 

    • #105
  16. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    TBA (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I support Israel because it is a fellow traveler. No ally is always on our side fully or us them.

    If you have an ally who is always fully on your side you should definitely check because that ally is either a servant, or too weak to have interests that diverge from your own.

    Well said. 

    • #106
  17. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    Is that so? You are playing identity politics.

    No, I’m not.

    Identity politics is about prioritizing your identity over other identities. That does not really apply here when I am criticizing a group of white nationalists and their keynote speaker who thought she would play with the words of Holocaust denial. 

    • #107
  18. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    I would just point out that the states of most of the Western hemisphere also have a history of immigration from across the globe.

    This actually makes me want to cry. European nations are so ill-defined it’s pointless to defend them.

    Everyone has a right to the West.

    • #108
  19. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    Again, her audience does not question the statistic out of undue concern for history. 

    Mind reading. 

    • #109
  20. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    Is that so? You are playing identity politics.

    No, I’m not.

    Identity politics is about prioritizing your identity over other identities. That does not really apply here when I am criticizing a group of white nationalists and their keynote speaker who thought she would play with the words of Holocaust denial.

    The JEWS promote their identity over other identities. How have you not seen that? You are doing it right here!

    Bethany did it! Ben Shapiro does it. Everyone who defends the Jewish identity while claiming the west has no identity is promoting jewish identity over all other identities! 

    • #110
  21. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    This is a lovely example of the Streisand Effect. I bet there are a lot more people acquainted with Mrs Malkin’s and the Groypers’ views than before this post was written.

    #irony

    • #111
  22. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Stina (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    Is that so? You are playing identity politics.

    No, I’m not.

    Identity politics is about prioritizing your identity over other identities. That does not really apply here when I am criticizing a group of white nationalists and their keynote speaker who thought she would play with the words of Holocaust denial.

    The JEWS promote their identity over other identities. How have you not seen that? You are doing it right here!

    Bethany did it! Ben Shapiro does it. Everyone who defends the Jewish identity while claiming the west has no identity is promoting jewish identity over all other identities!

    I did not say the West has no identity. I do not conflate West with “White.” The definition of whiteness has been so nebulous over the past few centuries anyways. People are entitled to their identity, but identity politics is a different game altogether because it relies on blaming “the other” for all of your problems. This then makes it possible to promote your identity at the expense of others. 

    It is possible to criticize Michelle Malkin and her behavior and her associations. 

     

    • #112
  23. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    For my own edification, I’ve been attempting to get some documented specifics as to the “other speakers” and their “language of Holocaust denial” almost since the start of this thread.  I remain unsuccessful.

    • #113
  24. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    I’ve been attempting to get some documented specifics as to the “other speakers” and “the language of Holocaust denial” almost since the start of this thread. I remain unsuccessful.

     

    The other speakers included Nick Fuentes and Patrick Casey (link here). Antisemites like to parse the statistics of the Holocaust, which is why she used the euphemism. You can have a David Irving level of Holocaust denial, or you can have the quibbling over the deaths of 5,500,000 people or 6,000,000. What it does create is a distraction from the antisemitism itself as we all start arguing over statistics when likely none of us have ever done any archival research on the matter. 

    • #114
  25. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    For my own edification, I’ve been attempting to get some documented specifics as to the “other speakers” and their “language of Holocaust denial” almost since the start of this thread. I remain unsuccessful.

    drlorentz (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    Again, her audience does not question the statistic out of undue concern for history.

    Mind reading.

    You don’t need to be mind reader. You can be judged by the company you keep. Do we really think they were there to listen to a history seminar on the proper recording of WWII fatalities from all theaters of the war?

    • #115
  26. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    For my own edification, I’ve been attempting to get some documented specifics as to the “other speakers” and their “language of Holocaust denial” almost since the start of this thread. I remain unsuccessful.

    drlorentz (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    Again, her audience does not question the statistic out of undue concern for history.

    Mind reading.

    You don’t need to be mind reader. You can be judged by the company you keep. Do we really think they were there to listen to a history seminar on the proper recording of WWII fatalities from all theaters of the war?

    Why would she even mention this if it didn’t apply to the audience?

    • #116
  27. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    Knowing who the other speakers are and knowing the language of Holocaust denial, yes, I can say that she is not asking those questions in good faith. Unless she is that naive, which I do not think she is.

    I’ve been attempting to get some documented specifics as to the “other speakers” and “the language of Holocaust denial” almost since the start of this thread. I remain unsuccessful.

    The other speakers included Nick Fuentes and Patrick Casey (link here). Antisemites like to parse the statistics of the Holocaust, which is why she used the euphemism. You can have a David Irving level of Holocaust denial, or you can have the quibbling over the deaths of 5,500,000 people or 6,000,000. What it does create is a distraction from the antisemitism itself as we all start arguing over statistics when likely none of us have ever done any archival research on the matter.

    I appreciate the answer but it’s essentially non-responsive in terms of specifics.  I’m aware who the other speakers were BTW.  I just know little about them save for second-hand characterizations, which I’ve been conditioned to distrust in this day and age.  There is an interesting discussion of the numbers, above in the thread.  For the record, I really wasn’t directing my inquiry to you in particular (or as a challenge), but only as to a problem in the thread.  I would’ve preferred that it be addressed in long form by the O/P as I indicated in #39, above.

    • #117
  28. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    You can be judged by the company you keep.

    The technical term is guilt by association.

    • #118
  29. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    drlorentz (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    You can be judged by the company you keep.

    The technical term is guilt by association.

    If you hang out with Groypers and call yourself their mom, I can judge your chosen association with them. 

    • #119
  30. V.S. Blackford Inactive
    V.S. Blackford
    @VSBlackford

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):

    drlorentz (View Comment):

    V.S. Blackford (View Comment):
    You can be judged by the company you keep.

    The technical term is guilt by association.

    If you hang out with Groypers and call yourself their mom, I can judge your chosen association with them.

    If you choose to attend a conference organized by a supporter of Groypers, you can expect to be judged for that choice.

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.