The parallels between grifters in Conservatism and false teachers within the church go beyond mere coincidence. Even the defense of said false teachers resembles the defense of grifters when they get caught. Black Rifle Coffee Company exemplifies this. Specifically positioned elites decided to circle the wagons after Black Rifle Coffee Company received backlash for a New York Time article they promoted profiling the company.
Dana Loesch was the former spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association, the largest gun rights advocacy group in America. She decided to shill once again for Evan Hafer and BRCC. It’s worth noting that Evan Hafer lied about donating to the McCain campaign in 2008 on Dana Loesch’s program, among other things. Dana Loesch interviews BRCC from the premise that they had to give comments to New York Times as they were going to run their article with or without comments. She even goes so far as to say they would have been stupid not to speak to the reporter, because they aren’t political (enough.) She uses this to then lecture conservatives about why they shouldn’t believe what is written in the New York Times.
Again, Black Rifle Coffee Company promoted the NYT article without disclaimer, and then after a terrible PR weekend, decided on Monday and Tuesday to do spin interviews to save face. Dana Loesch’s audience was not amused by her softball interview as the video was ratioed on YouTube with her lackey husband Chris Loesch attempting to defend her in the comment section from basic unaddressed questions.
Evan Hafer also claims that the backlash he received was in part because he is Jewish.
Clay Travis and Buck Sexton are the duo that is filling to timeslot of the late great Rush Limbaugh. They similarly gave a softball interview from the premise that they were in a lose-lose situation because of the New York Times. This is a nonsensical assumption. BRCC could have not talked to the NYT and labeled their article a hit piece and used it for (good) publicity. Instead they promoted it. It wasn’t a hit piece until it became inconvenient.
This is blatant elitism where those at the top, especially Dana Loesch, have a disdain for their audience’s intellect. They expect their audience to buy this spin the same way they expect their audience to believe that Evan Hafer donated to Obama because he lost a bet. You would think that a grifter would recognize that defending another grifter is not the hill to die on or the sword to fall on. But perhaps when the fellow grifter is a multimillionaire, other priorities take precedent.
This is quite similar to what goes on in the church: elites circle the wagons to defend men caught with their pants down whether it be Ed Litton or Al Mohler.