'F*** them forever': Andrew Schulz's show canceled hours after Trump interview goes live



Ahead of the 2016 election, comedian Jimmy Fallon traded laughs with then-candidate Donald Trump on "The Tonight Show." Democratic boosters and other leftists condemned the host for "humanizing" the Republican.

Future "Jeopardy!" host Ken Jennings joined other middling media personalities in further insinuating that Fallon was racist-adjacent and courting white supremacists, while others called for the comedian's cancellation.

Unfortunately for comedian Andrew Schulz, it appears that intolerance has not dissipated over the past eight years.

Schulz revealed on the Wednesday episode of the "Flagrant" podcast that a New York venue canceled what would have been his special just hours after he hosted the once and possibly future Republican president.

'It's booked. It's ready to go. We're going on sale this week.'

According to Schulz, he was set to shoot his next comedy special at the Brooklyn Academy of Music. However, shortly after his massively popular interview with Trump went live, the venue notified him that it was canceling the gig.

"It was an awesome interview and everybody loved it, and then a day later, [producer] Dov [Mamann] was like, 'Oh by the way, the venue you're going to shoot your special in canceled your shows,'" said Schulz. "Within three hours."

"Flagrant" co-host Akaash Singh said, "After we interviewed him, before the episode comes out, he goes to the venue. Everybody leaves on Schulz's special team. All of them have to go to the venue to check it out. I assume everything is good."

"Yeah, so we've had these venues locked in for months now," replied Schulz. "It's not like, 'We might do it here.' It's booked. It's ready to go. We're going on sale this week. We had the entire production team come out for the — this is for the third time many of us are spotting the venue and looking and everything. We have the set design already curated. We're moving around seating plots, camera — it's ready to go."

"I don't know if it's the Trump interview," said Schulz. "But the day before it came out, we were ready to go and were going on sale this week. And three and a half hours afterwards, we get this email."

The podcast shared an image of an Oct. 9 email from the venue, which read:

First off, I want to thank you for thinking of BAM for Andrew Schulz's upcoming comedy show. We are always excited when promoters consider our space for their events. After some internal discussion with leadership, it was decided that BAM is not the right fit for this show at this time. That said, we really do appreciate you reaching out and we'd love to work with you on future events that might be a better match for BAM. Our door is always open for a chat about other shows you think might work well in our space. Thanks for considering us. Looking forward to potentially collaborating down the line!

Diane Max, former board chair for Planned Parenthood NYC and current Planned Parenthood Federation of America board member, is the chair of the venue's board of trustees. Planned Parenthood endorsed Kamala Harris once again in July.

"F*** them and f*** them forever," added Schulz.

Mamann, who emphasized the venue had previously been receptive to the content planned for Schulz's special, suggested this "felt personal."

After yelling "MAGA," Schulz joked that while his "vote was up for grabs," the board of the venue has pushed him in a particular direction.

Blaze News reached out to the Brooklyn Academy of Music but did not receive an immediate response.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Melania Trump reveals personal de-banking experience: Is your financial freedom at risk?



In a revealing Sunday interview with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo, former first lady Melania Trump revealed some of the political backlash she has faced as the wife of embattled former President Donald Trump.

First lady Trump revealed that “the bank suddenly informed me they will not be able to do business with me anymore.” She also claimed that an “email distribution service provider just rapidly terminated my agreement.”

As Farage himself pointed out, 'This is serious political persecution at the very highest level of our system. If they can do it to me, they can do it to you, too.'

These instances of disenfranchising people may seem only to affect the individuals, but the practice of de-banking has broader consequences as well.

She also detailed an incident with a university involving a philanthropic effort. She was donating money to help foster students gain access to scholarships. The university initially accepted her donation but, upon learning her identity, refused to accept her contribution. In this incident, Melania said, “They didn’t want to do business with me because of political affiliation, my political beliefs.”

Organizations refusing to associate with individuals over political differences is not a one-off occurrence with the former first lady; rather, this shows how ubiquitous this practice has become in our current political climate.

For example, Alliance Defending Freedom’s Jay Hobbs described a disturbing trend among banks that shut down organizations that differ from them in political or religious belief. He detailed an incident involving Bank of America and Indigenous Advance Ministries, a “charity [that] serves widows and orphans in Uganda, helping to meet basic physical needs while striving to equip and strengthen Christians to share the Gospel with their fellow Ugandans.” Bank of America informed the charity that it no longer wished to associate with Indigenous Advance’s “business type” because it exceeded the “bank’s risk tolerance.” This caused many headaches and inconveniences for the organization, which was preparing for an upcoming trip to help the widows and orphans.

De-banking was brought to more people's attention when, in 2023, Nigel Farage, a figurehead of the U.K. Independence Party, claimed that his banks in the U.K. were closing his accounts. There is a great deal of evidence that his bank, Coutts, did intend to “exit” Farage as a customer, including some inside communications released in a dossier and obtained by Farage. These communications included statements about him, citing “significant reputational risks of being associated with him” and that his opinions were “at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation.”

Apparently, Nigel Farage holds beliefs contrary to those deemed acceptable by the banks with which he freely associated. His bank closed his account simply because it was a “bad look” to continue this association. These incidents have many worrying consequences in our heated political climate. As Farage himself pointed out, “This is serious political persecution at the very highest level of our system. If they can do it to me, they can do it to you, too.”

De-banking is a serious issue that is becoming increasingly widespread. It affects political leaders and actors and trickles down to private citizens associated with political figures, their philanthropic efforts, and legitimate charities. This de-banking effort is a clear weaponization of legitimate banking practice for political and religious purposes, and organizations that engage in this behavior need to be held accountable if real politics are to continue.

University Of Pittsburg Shifts Blame After Firing Med School Professor For Criticizing DEI

Wang says agents of the university violated his free speech rights and retaliated against him for reporting on the unlawful use of race in graduate programs.

Coutts claimed it de-banked Nigel Farage for financial reasons. The Brexiteer has since obtained the real reasons — and an apology from the bank president.



Nigel Farage, the former English politician who proved instrumental in the 2020 restoration of British sovereignty via Brexit, obtained documents this week revealing that his de-banking by Coutts was grossly political in nature.

According to the Telegraph, Coutts bank, part of the NatWest Group, previously indicated to the BBC and the Financial Times that Farage's account had been closed for financial reasons.

That claim has since crumbled, resulting in an apology — not from the media outlets who got it wrong but from the head of the bank.

Farage recently obtained a damning 40-page file from Coutts bank via a "subject access request," which was subsequently published in its entirety by the Daily Mail.

The document, which had been presented to the bank's wealth reputational risk committee in November 2022 and focused on Farage's "controversial profile in public life and politics," acknowledged he was a commercially-viable customer, contrary to the bank's earlier suggestion.

Notwithstanding his viability, the document provided a number of politically charged reasons why Coutts would be best off closing Farage's account and "exiting" him upon the expiry of his mortgage, even though "it is very likely that the client would 'go public.'"

While admitting that there was "nothing substantive" to shore up allegations that he might have unbecoming "Russian connections," the document stressed that he had made a number of "public comments that created an increased reputational risk of Coutts continuing to bank with him."

Among the remarks, social media posts, and stances Farage took that got the bank 's dander up were:

  • his 2020 comparison of the destructive and scandal-prone Black Lives Matter movement to the Taliban over their shared iconoclastic tendency to tear down statues;
  • his October 2022 suggestion that British politician Grant Shapps was a "remainer and a globalist";
  • his September 2022 suggestion that vicious tensions between Islamic and Hindu groups in Leicester were resultant of politicians deciding "to go down the road of diversity and multiculturalism";
  • his criticism of climate alarmism and his suggestion that "Net zero is net stupid";
  • his "Endorsements of Donald Trump"; and
  • his appearances on InfoWars.

The document further insinuated that Farage could be regarded as a "disingenuous grifter" with "xenophobic, chauvinistic and racist views."

Farage, who previously suggested his de-banking amounted to "political persecution," responded to the document, calling it "astonishing, it's abusive and it makes a whole series of wildly false statements about Russia while acknowledging I have not been convicted of anything."

He further characterized the bank document as a "Stasi-style surveillance report."

Suealla Braverman, a British Conservative member of Parliament and Home Secretary, noted Wednesday, "The Coutts scandal exposes the sinister nature of much of the Diversity, Equity & Inclusion industry Apparently anyone who wants to control our borders & stop the boats can be branded 'xenophobic' & have their bank account closed in the name of 'inclusivity.'"

Braverman suggested that other organizations "who have naively adopted this politically biased dogma need a major rethink."

Following similar denunciations from other parliamentarians, Alison Rose, the chief executive of NatWest Group, apologized to Farage Thursday, writing, "I am writing to apologise for the deeply inappropriate comments about yourself made in the now published papers prepared for the Wealth Committee. ... I would like to make it clear that they do not reflect the view of the bank," reported GB News.

"I believe very strongly that freedom of expression and access to banking are fundamental to our society and it is absolutely not our policy to exit a customer on the basis of legally held political and personal views," added Rose. "To this end, I would like to personally reiterate our offer to you of alternative banking arrangements at NatWest."

Farage responded on Twitter, writing, "Dame Alison Rose’s apology is a start, but it is no more than that. She needs to take responsibility as CEO, and is wrong to say the views of her own committee’s report don’t reflect the bank. I will now defend thousands of other people that have been de-banked on her watch."

It appears neither the BBC nor the BBC reporter, Simon Jack, who originally peddled Coutts' false claims about Farage's cancellation, have yet apologized to the Brexiteer.

The Sunday Times reported that following the revelation that Farage's politics likely played a determining factor in his de-banking, NatWest will soon be faced with an avalanche of requests from tens-of-thousands of similarly de-banked customers to know why they were kicked to the curb.

De-banking is not a uniquely British phenomenon.

JPMorgan Chase canceled the faith-based nonprofit National Committee for Religious Freedom's checking account last year, reported the Christian Post.

Sam Brownback, NCRF chairman and former Trump ambassador-at-large or international religious freedom, indicated there was "never an official cause given" or forewarning for the account closure.

NCRF Executive Director Justin Murff posed the question, "If they can 'de-bank' the NCRF, a multi-faith religious nonprofit, what happens when they start 'de-banking' pastors and Christian business people?"

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) subsequently penned a letter to the bank's CEO, Jamie Dimon, stating, "I have previously noted my grave concern with politically-motivated de-banking. Bank decisions should be made using impartial risk standards to determine credit worthiness, not arbitrary political or ideological concerns."

Nebraska State Treasurer John Murante (R) wrote an opinion piece in Newsweek in March, highlighting how Chase "has denied payments or canceled accounts associated with people and organizations—such as former ambassador Sam Brownback, the Arkansas Family Council, Defense of Liberty, and retired general Michael Flynn, Jr—for holding mainstream American views. In fact, a former Chase executive described the bank's practice of 'red-dotting,' where Chase employees can flag customers for cancelation based on their perceived reputational or social risk."

Murante added, "When powerful banks like Chase retain unbridled discretion to cancel accounts for arbitrary or biased reasons, it undermines the freedom of everyday Americans to participate in society and the marketplace without fear of discrimination based on their political or religious views."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

10 Christmas Songs That Must Be Cancelled By The End Of 2021

To make 'the most wonderful time of the year' more inclusive and tolerant, I'll be leaving you with a list of the most offensive Christmas songs that absolutely must go this holiday season.

Fictional movie murderer Michael Myers accused of being homophobic in new 'Halloween' movie



Michael Myers, the central fictional figure of the "Halloween" movie franchise, is homophobic, according to certain corners of social media.

What are the details?

Myers, or "The Shape," has been accused of homophobia after killing a same-sex couple in the newest "Halloween" installment, 2021's "Halloween Kills."

TMZ on Wednesday reported, "This is actually a thing ... the latest iteration of the masked madman is being accused by some Twitter truthers of being homophobic for offing a same-sex couple in the new 'Halloween Kills' movie ... which just came out about a week or so ago."

In the film, Myers executes a gay couple inside their home — which used to belong to Myers' family — and eventually lays their bodies next to one another on the ground. One of the men is sitting upright against a bookshelf while another lies on his back, one knee raised, with his hands folded over his stomach and his head on his dead partner's knee.

As TMZ pointed out, "Dude literally kills everyone in his path — black people, gay people, young and old ... and any gender."

What has been the response?

One clearly ruffled social user tweeted, "Michael Myers is homophobic[.]"

Michael Myers is homophobic #HalloweenKills https://t.co/dVeO4Hvqh5

— ECDD 512 (@isaelvalen) 1634445662.0

TMZ reported that another user wrote, "HALLOWEEN KILLS WAS SO GOOD BUT WHY DID MICHAEL HAVE TO KILL THE ONE GAY COUPLE... MICHAEL MYERS IS HOMOPHOBIC CONFIRMED."

WeGotThisCovered reported that another user quipped, "[A]ll i got from the new halloween movie is that michael myers is homophobic[.]"

Another added, "Can't believe Michael Myers is homophobic #cancelled."

"Watched Halloween Kills last night and y'all horror gays lied to me I didn't know Michael Myers was homophobic," another user noted, according to the outlet.

"Michael Myers is a racist homophobic murderer. No respect for him now," another user complained.

Another user marveled, "[T]he juxtaposition of michael myers killing a gay couple and chucky [the evil doll] talking about his genderfluid child in the same week is just insane[.]"

The TMZ report added, "While many appreciated the representation, others appear to have been offended by these two guys being among the body count. There've also been a few articles and op-eds written on the matter — and despite most who acknowledge it as silly ... some are pointing out 'The Shape' may, in fact, not be as progressive as some of his counterparts."

What else?

It seems fair to point out that social media wasn't paying much attention to what was happening in the film before circulating reports that the Myers character is gay — considering the fact that if you look closely at the photo behind the slain gay couple, it is a decidedly benign mirror image to the grisly scene taking place on the floor immediately below it.

#MichaelMyers is not homophobic. #HalloweenKills https://t.co/dMvvNhKhF3

— Sarah Taylor (@thesarahdtaylor) 1635355758.0

Anything else to know?

"Halloween" star Jamie Lee Curtis, who starred in both the 1978 original film and some of its successive films, recently spoke out about the gory horror flick and said that portions of the film mirror Jan. 6 riots at the U.S. Capitol.

She explained that the new film is "about rage, about a mob of angry people who don't trust the government, who don't trust the police, who don't trust the authorities to get the job done."

"They're going to do the job themselves," she added.

(Content warning: Graphic violence, gore):

Halloween Kills - Official Trailerwww.youtube.com

Crowder and Whitlock have an honest conversation about racism in America



Jason Whitlock joined Steven Crowder for a long form conversation with cigars and drinks. They discussed truth, censorship, cancel culture and what the biggest issue for black Americans is in 2021.

"So, Mr. Whitlock," Crowder began. "We had you on the show a while back and the reaction was intense how much the audience liked you. The word that kept coming back was authentic," Crowder said.

"I hope it's my authenticity," Whitlock replied. He went on to say that the values taught in sports create a "great synergy" between sports fans and conservatives. But, ultimately, Whitlock believes that racism is being used to destroy Christianity.

Watch the clip to hear more from this outstanding installment of Ash Wednesday. Can't watch? Download the podcast here.



Want more from Steven Crowder?

To enjoy more of Steven's uncensored late-night comedy that's actually funny, join Mug Club — the only place for all of Crowder uncensored and on demand.