Sunday, May 26, 2024
HomeLaura PerrinsRussell Brand a sleazeball? You read it here first, second and third

Russell Brand a sleazeball? You read it here first, second and third


SO ONCE Russell Brand went rogue and was no longer on message and couldn’t be used to push the agendas of the BBC and Channel 4 in particular, namely drug legalisation by the former and all-round depravity by the latter, they decided to expose him for what all right-thinking people knew he was: a dirtbag, a nightmare and, for the purposes of libel law, an ‘alleged’ sex pest. 

Give me a break. Honestly, the brass neck of these two giants of media to turn on Brand now and to expect us all to be thankful for it.

For years and years the BBC and Channel 4 have pushed this degenerate human being on us because it suited them. Russell Brand was everything normal people, people with any kind of moral compass and readers of TCW, were not – a pusher of the legalisation of dangerous drugs, an admitted sex addict, a cruel bully, ultra-promiscuous and all round ultra-left-wing idol. Brand was never smart. He was certainly never funny, and I doubt he was ever talented. It’s like they made him in a lab just to annoy me.

Brand was the kind of person that if by accident he ever popped up on my TV screen I’d immediately turn it off and probably start sprinkling the holy water and saying a few decades of the rosary. His odiousness was obvious and infectious. His debauchery was trumpeted by the ever-edgy Channel 4. The debauchery was the point.

Brand took joy in humiliating not just women but men too, Andrew Sachs being the most obvious victim of his cruelty. 

This outrageous exploit in which Jonathan Ross was his accomplice was forgiven as a ‘prank’.

In fact, the ultra-liberal views on sex and drugs and outright hideousness of the man were the very reason he was raised to stratospheric levels of fame. Brand was gifted not one but two fawning interviews on Newsnight. In addition, Ed Miliband, an actual politician who was asking the British public to make him Prime Minister, thought it necessary to beg for Brand’s endorsement, for which he was rightly nominated as ‘villain of the day’ by us. 

I think I’ll quote this one in full: ‘We can’t work out who we dislike more. Russell Brand’s interview with Ed Miliband was like Bollinger Bolsheviks R Us. At least the young lefty luvvies who will have watched it will be too lazy or hung over to vote Labour this time next week. The Labour leader travelled to Brand’s £2million home in trendy Hoxton to be questioned in his kitchen for the YouTube video. The former drug addict has previously told his millions of followers not to “bother” voting. Why has Ed indulged him? What was he thinking? Maybe he thought the interview would improve his credentials as a potential international statesman.’

So you will excuse me if I feel the rage boiling up when these very same media outlets, the BBC and Channel 4, now put their serious hats on and get out their serious journalist faces and say, actually it turns out Brand was an ‘alleged’ sex pest and he was hiding in plain sight.

No, he wasn’t. You hid him. You did the hiding and the facilitating of the ‘sex pest’. Hell, the BBC even sent a car to pick up a 16-year-old girl from school and chauffeur her to his house. So no, you don’t get to do serious journalism now. For that, you have to come here. We at TCW have been calling out Brand for a long time indeed.

Here is TCW’s David Keighley slamming the BBC and Newsnight in particular for giving Brand a huge platform to push his agenda. Keighley: ‘Where are the BBC Trustees when you most need them? In fact, what this “interview” actually demonstrated was not only the fawning incompetence of new Newsnight presenter Evan Davis but also that the BBC – in its pursuit of the very same right-on causes that Brand so ineptly and weirdly espouses – has forfeited any right to be taken seriously as a news organisation.’ This was way back in 2014. 

Amen to that.

And it wasn’t just the BBC and Channel 4. Russell Brand’s very special brand of views have been forced upon impressionable teenagers when his wisdom formed part of an A-level English course. I’m not kidding. It is very important to make A-level courses ‘relevant’ to the youth, don’t you know.

Chris McGovern on TCW called this dangerous nonsense out at the time, in 2014.  He wrote: ‘The text of the telephone bullying on live radio of Andrew Sachs by Russell Brand and Jonathan Ross has already been used as a GCSE text. It beggars belief that Brand should now be judged as suitable for A-Level.’

The entire idea of celebrities such as Russell Brand setting drug policy was slammed in this very personal account on TCW.  Yet he was still invited to present his views to a House of Commons Select Committee on drugs policy, which he kept waiting, only to humiliate one elderly Labour MP on it for laughs (he was not reprimanded by the chairman).

Outright racist comments made by Brand were highlighted and criticised here by Matt Walsh, who rightly sums Brand up as ‘a visionary revolutionary to the intellectually challenged, an irritating moron to everyone else’. 

So why am I saying this, why am I essentially saying we were here first, and we told the mainstream media so and our readers so, who through their time and very generous donations make this website happen? Because it demonstrates yet again why you should reject pretty much every media-created figure/personality they give you. They are bigging up a certain person only because it suits their agenda. 

Brand was a very special creature: left-wing, drug legaliser and sex pusher, the type of person the conservatives would loathe. I mean who cares if it’s an open secret that he is a sex pest? He is a walking advertisement for low standards and debauchery, which is exactly what the left-wing media want the public, and the kids especially, to embrace.

So it makes you think, just which of the media darlings are they protecting now? Just which of the people we are told that you must really love and agree with will be exposed in a few years’ time as an utter slimeball?

A final word. Some very concerning reports have reached my ears that people who might be regarded as ‘on the right’ have leapt to Brand’s defence because he might have recently been against the Covid vaccine or some such nonsense. My advice to you is get a hold of yourselves. Engage the brain. 

Brand might have seen what way the wind was blowing on that and picked a side. Or maybe he really believes it. Who cares? So what?

It doesn’t stop him from not only being wrong on every other issue he ever spoke on and it doesn’t stop him from being a sleazeball who enjoyed embarrassing and humiliating people,liked to make rape jokes and talk about killing women. Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? 

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.