Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

Twitter

Creator of popular 'Five Nights at Freddy's' video games announces retirement after woke mob goes after him for donating to Republicans

by Leave a Comment

The creator of a popular video game series announced his retirement this week after a woke cancel culture mob attacked him for several political donations he made to public officials viewed as hostile toward LGBT people.

Scott Cawthon, who made the hit indie horror game “Five Nights at Freddy’s” and its sequels, announced on his website that he will be retiring from the series, handing it over to a different video game developer while he spends more time with his family.

“I’ve had a blessed, fulfilling, and rich career,” Cawthon wrote. “I’ve been shown great kindness and I’ve tried to show great kindness in return. I’ve tried to make some good games (let the debate ensue), and I’ve witnessed the creation of possibly the most creative and talented fanbase on the planet.”

“But here on the seventh anniversary of the first game’s trailer, as I realize that I was in my mid-30s when I created the series and now I’m approaching my mid-40s, I realize that I miss a lot of things that I got to focus on before FNAF became such a success,” he continued. “I miss making games for my kids, I miss doing it just for fun, and I missing making rpgs even though I stink at it. All of this is to say that I am retiring. I have been shown tremendous love and support over this last week, a lot of which has come from the LGBTQ community. The kindness shown to me has been surreal.”

While Cawthon’s statement doesn’t mention the controversy over his political donations, last weekend he was harshly criticized on Reddit and Twitter for making several financial contributions to various politicians, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), former President Donald Trump, and former Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard. All together, Cawthon made over $42,000 in campaign contributions to mostly Republican candidatesm and as a result he was accused of being racist and anti-LGBT.

On Saturday, before announcing his retirement, he directly addressed his critics in a Reddit post and refused to apologize for being a Christian, a Republican, and someone who has always treated all people fairly and equally no matter who they are.

To say that the last few days have been surreal would be an understatement. I’ve debated greatly how best to address this, including not addressing it at all, but with so many people from the LGBT community in the fanbase that I love, that’s not an option. I’d like to think that the last seven years would have given me the benefit of the doubt in regards to how I try to treat people, but there I was, trending on twitter for being a homophobe, getting doxed, with people threatening to come to my house. My wife is six weeks pregnant and she spent last night in fear because of what was being said online. She has already been struggling with her pregnancy so seeing her so afraid really scared me. All this because I exercised my right, and my duty, as an American citizen, to vote for and support the candidates who I felt could best run the country, for everyone, and that’s something that I won’t apologize for.

For those who took the time to look, you saw that the candidates I supported included men, women, white people, black people, republicans, and democrats. I supported Kimberly Klacik in Baltimore because I believed that she really cared for the African American community there and wanted to pull them out of poverty. I believed she could have really make a difference in a time when so many black communities were struggling. She lost, unfortunately. I supported Tulsi Gabbard, a democrat, even though I disagreed with her on several issues, because I felt she would have been a good and fair president. And yes, I supported President Trump, because I felt he was the best man to fuel a strong economy and stand up to America’s enemies abroad, of which there are many. Even if there were candidates who had better things to say to the LGBT community directly, and bigger promises to make, I believed that their stances on other issues would have ended up doing much greater harm to those communities than good. All of this explanation, I fear, is wasted, as people don’t want to discuss with one another anymore; they want endless apologies and submission. People who are expecting those from me will get neither.

Cawthon said that if he gets canceled for his views, he would be at peace with it. “I don’t do this for the money anymore; I do it because I enjoy it,” he wrote.

“If people think I’m doing more harm than good now, then maybe it’s better that I get cancelled and retire. I would accept that. I’ve had a fulfilling career. Besides, most things that people can take from you are things that never had much value to begin with.”

In the post confirming his retirement, Cawthon explained that the “Five Nights at Freddy’s” series would be handed off to “someone of my choosing, and someone that I trust.”

“I have SIX kids now (although one of them is currently the size of a blueberry.) I love them dearly; they are my whole world and my whole universe,” he said. “I want to focus my attention on them, focus on protecting them, and spend my time making things for them. I only ask that my fanbase respect my decision.”

Texas reporter goes rogue during live shot, says station is ‘muzzling’ her. The video has been viewed more than 2 million times.

by Leave a Comment

A Fox affiliate reporter went off-script during a Monday report on the Texas heat wave, stating that the “Fox Corp.” was “muzzling” her and preventing its viewers from receiving “certain information.”

KRIV-TV reporter Ivory Hecker said that she planned to release the information — which she’d covertly recorded — to James O’Keefe’s
Project Veritas.

What are the details?

During a live shot, Hecker — a general assignment reporter and fill-in anchor — was preparing to deliver a report on Texas weather when she began, “Before we get to that story, I want to let you, the viewers, know that Fox Corp. has been muzzling me to keep certain information from you. And from what I am gathering, I am not the only reporter being subjected to this. I am going to be releasing some recordings about what goes on behind the scenes at Fox, because it applies to you, the viewers.”

“I found a nonprofit journalism group called Project Veritas that’s going to help put that out tomorrow, so tune into them,” she continued.

Hecker did not elaborate on what she recorded or what she planned to discuss with Project Veritas.

A spokesperson for Project Veritas told Insider that Hecker “will be sitting down for an interview with the group on Tuesday evening to discuss claims of ‘corruption’ and ‘censorship’ that she has regarding her employer.”

“The spokesman added that Hecker will be, among other things, ‘blowing the whistle’ and speaking out about how she believes corporate journalism is ‘broken,'” the outlet added.

A spokesperson for the organization told the Daily Beast that it plans to publish some of Hecker’s recordings, which she says corroborates her accusations.

For a previous story, Hecker herself told Newsweek — which reported that video footage of Hecker’s remarks has been viewed more than 2 million times at the time of this reporting — that she has had issues with the network since “last August” when relations reportedly took a “dark turn” following an interview she conducted.

“They decided they didn’t like what the interview subject had said, and they went on to internally harass and defame me,” Hecker insisted. “I knew I was not working for a journalistic organization when I was called into an HR meeting in December and was told to keep my support for free speech and opposition to censorship to myself — that those were not matters to be publicly spoken about.”

“True journalism can’t exist in an environment of censorship,” Hecker added. “True journalism needs an environment of free speech.”

It is unclear at the time of this reporting whether Hecker is still employed at KRIV.

'Where's Joe?': House Republicans mock photo of first lady Jill Biden 'prepping' for G7 summit — and leftists hit back hard

by Leave a Comment

House Republicans wasted no time mocking a photo of first lady Jill Biden “prepping for the G7” summit that appeared on her official Twitter page Wednesday:

And what did the House GOP wonder in response?

“Where’s Joe?” they asked.

It’s a fair question, especially given longstanding chatter about what many say is the diminished cognitive state of her husband, President Joe Biden.

Jill Biden has been a constant presence at Joe Biden’s side since before the election, and questions have come up regarding how much she’s helping her husband get through his public appearances.

On Wednesday she told Biden to “pay attention” as she spoke to American service members stationed in the United Kingdom. While sympathetic news outlets passed it off as a joke between the couple, the photo of her “prepping for the G7” may have been a bit much for Republican House members.

After all, why would a first lady, who’s not elected and has no authority, prep for a summit of world leaders?

What was the reaction?

As you might expect, leftists hit back at the GOP House members’ “Where’s Joe?” dig and didn’t let up:

  • “Not trolling on Twitter like a child,” one commenter shot back. “I know that much.”
  • “I guess the notion of a woman doing something other than keeping house without her husband isn’t comfortable for you,” another user quipped.
  • “Any INTELLIGENT woman would want to know what will be discussed at the Global meeting of the World,” another commenter offered. “Could you imagine someone of her stature walking in and just standing there ‘to look pretty’ as if she were a prop!”
  • “Seriously? Advertising your misogynistic attitudes is not a good look,” another user said. “But go ahead, it’s why you’ve lost the majority of the educated women’s vote….”

Others Biden fans loved the first lady’s photo caption:

  • “Cannot hide the educator as she reads… pen in hand like an extension of her entire being… she’s SO GOOD she doesn’t need highlighters,” one commenter gushed.
  • “It’s so wonderful to see a first lady actually working not just having a photo op on our dime!” another user added.
  • “This is beyond refreshing,” another commenter declared. “Thank you for being an intelligent first lady who is bringing respect back to our country.”

Twitter’s Calvinball Rules on Illegally Obtained Materials

by Leave a Comment

(Photo Illustration: Dado Ruvic/Reuters)

You may recall, in the fall of 2020 in the heat of the presidential campaign, Twitter locking a major American newspaper, the New York Post, out of its account over the Post‘s story on the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop. It did the same to the Trump campaign and its press secretary for sharing the Post‘s reportage. According to Twitter at the time, this was not due to any issue with the authenticity of the Post‘s journalism (which turned out to be well-supported and all-but-admitted by the younger Biden), but because of a Twitter policy, purportedly in place since 2018, that “prohibits the use of our service to distribute content obtained without authorization. We don’t want to incentivize hacking by allowing Twitter to be used as distribution for possibly illegally obtained materials.”

As with so many things in the world of Big Tech regulating the speech of its users, this was a policy suddenly applied on the fly to a story that helped Donald Trump against Joe Biden. The rule was abandoned by Twitter once it had served its purpose, and the journalistic solons who defended it had no such qualms when the New York Times published Trump’s confidential tax returns. They are now unconcerned that ProPublica is publishing “a vast trove of Internal Revenue Service data on the tax returns of thousands of the nation’s wealthiest people, covering more than 15 years,” all of which was extremely illegal for anyone to leak to the press. This is reminiscent of when Facebook and Twitter recently blocked another Post article about a “Marxist” Black Lives Matter founder buying a swanky mansion, on the theory that it revealed details about her private residence, a rule that is likewise not applied at all consistently. Just this week, a major controversy in the New York newspapers revolves around the residence of mayoral candidate Eric Adams. The press has likewise pursued House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy over an apartment he leases; Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post even directed his readers to where they could find “good photos of the property.”

The lesson here is that these platforms make up rules on the fly without any sort of principle, then change the rules as needed (or when they are no longer needed). That will only fan the flames of calls for the government to regulate their vast power over the distribution of public speech.