Richard Spencer's Wife Divorces Him - Cites Abuse

[LillyCaterina]

This meme is comedy gold.

My first hubby came home drunk one night and ordered me to get out of bed to look at the fresh fallen snow. I told him to leave me alone cause I had to get up and go to work. So he grabbed me up out of bed and slammed me against the wall and said, "I told you to look at the fuckin' snow!"

Hurting people we say we love is not right, Clodovech. And it isn't funny.

[Norman Pride]

I wouldn't call Bleyer's statements a "disagreement". 'Libel' and 'unfounded character assassination' seems more fitting. There is nothing proven about the allegations towards Spencer as of yet, but still people are overly eager to jump on the bandwagon of condemning him for all kinds of vile acts he is supposed to have committed. The fact that he is a central figure in the Alt-Right movement, should call for a higher level of cautiousness among the people who share the central tenants of his ideology. The people willing to step into the public light and press the issues that are closest to our hearts, are few and far between, especially the ones with a high verbal and cognitive intelligence. They are smeared and attacked from every angle, by powerful media outlets, international corporations, and governments on all levels. If even the people who have every reason to give these people moral support, choose not to, and instead resort to the same tactics and sentiments as our enemies, then there's not much hope for our movement.

I'm not saying he is exempt from responsibility for his actions, should they prove to be true. And if so, I hope the Alt-Right breaks all connection with him. But I think he deserves the basic judicial right of being considered innocent until proven guilty, just as anyone else. But by the looks of it, some people just like to see others fall.

Nope, I am simply operating by the principle of 'innocent until proven guilt', and pointing out other people's reluctance to adhere to this same basic principle, which seem to be based on nothing else than feminist (il)logic and religious female victimhood.

Before we continue this discussion further, make sure you read this in its entirety:

https://www.scribd.com/document/3915...orce-Paperwork

There is bountiful evidence that Spencer has been abusive towards his wife. Nobody bases this "on nothing else than feminist (il)logic and religious female victimhood."

[Þoreiðar]

So you are saying that if there are voice recordings of someone saying something, the default that should be assumed is that they are faked? If someone has bruises and submits photos thereof, the default assumption should be that the photos are faked? Or is it only the case if the accuser is a woman? Because that's what it seems like you're suggesting here.

Nah, that's not what you said. You said recordings of him "shouting into the phone" is enough to settle the case. What is that supposed to prove? That he's not a cyborg?

Once again, because I have seen damning evidence. I am not interested in gender, but only intersted in facts.

What evidence? So far, only supposed screenshots of short conversations without much context have come to light, to my knowledge.

His wife also doesn't seem to have a motive.

Does Spencer have a motive for abusing her?

[Þoreiðar]

Before we continue this discussion further, make sure you read this in its entirety:

https://www.scribd.com/document/3915...orce-Paperwork

I have to disappoint you there. I don't have through 78 pages of court documents in order to stand by basic judicial principles.

From what I did read, Spencer does come across as a douche. But I don't see it fair to judge anyone on that basis alone. I'd say pictures of bruises and recorded (or otherwise verifiable) confessions by Spencer of abusing her would get me onboard the train. But so far, there's been nothing of that sort.

[Schmetterling]

Nah, that's not what you said. You said recordings of him "shouting into the phone" is enough to settle the case. What is that supposed to prove? That he's not a cyborg?

Come on, you are grasping at staws here. I was referring to the phone recordings of him shouting and telling her to kill herself, among others. The transcripts are in the court documents. Like NP said, before we continue to debate this, it's best you read the court documents, so that you know what is being talked about. I am not going to reproduce every single detail every single time.

What evidence? So far, only supposed screenshots of short conversations without much context have come to light, to my knowledge.

Follow the link NP posted above, the entire court documents are there. They include phone recording transcripts, chat transcripts, emails, photos of bruises, statements from Spencer's father and a doctor who examined his wife.

Does Spencer have a motive for abusing her?

Abusers don't need motives, as it's not always something planned and calculated. If you wonder why he did it, probably a consequence of certain patterns like alcoholism and anger management issues. Spencer had, according to the court documents, both issues. Financial issues might also have come into play, there were also overdue bills in thousands of dollars and collectors' letters. Some local bar near where he lives published a declined credit card receipt for a drink he ordered. Entitlement, lack of empathy are also reasons people abuse. Since he is a public person, and called himself important and famous, it's possible all the status and power got to his head. Also, abusers confuse people for things. A misogynist ideology taken to extremes can fuel such beliefs.

[Norman Pride]

I have to disappoint you there. I don't have through 78 pages of court documents in order to stand by basic judicial principles.

From what I did read, Spencer does come across as a douche. But I don't see it fair to judge anyone on that basis alone. I'd say pictures of bruises and recorded (or otherwise verifiable) confessions by Spencer of abusing her would get me onboard the train. But so far, there's been nothing of that sort.

Then with all due respect, I see no point in discussing this further with you. You refuse to examine the evidence but talk as if those things did not exist, and expect others to get on board with that. Sorry but that's dowright ignorance. Both pictures and recorded instances of Spencer are present in the court documents. Of course to get a clear picture you'd have to see all the evidence, there are a lot of other things that paint the picture, but since you refuse to examine it - maybe because it contradicts your preconceptions? - I'll make it easy on you: pictures of bruises are on page 38. Page 39 is a transcript of a phone recording where Spencer asks his wife whether her parents will attend her funeral and pushes her into a stove. Page 51 where he threatens her to break her nose, again transcript of an audio recording. Page 54 a transcript of a phone recording where he tells her that she should kill herself.

[Þoreiðar]

Come on, you are grasping at staws here. I was referring to the phone recordings of him shouting and telling her to kill herself, among others.

You should have made that clear, then. Still wouldn't prove physical abuse, though.

The transcripts are in the court documents. Like NP said, before we continue to debate this, it's best you read the court documents, so that you know what is being talked about. I am not going to reproduce every single detail every single time.

There's so much stuff in those documents that doesn't really have anything to do with the case or the accusations towards Spencer, and I'm not going to sieve through all of it. I read through most of it, though. If there's anything in particular that you think proves that he abused his wife, why not just refer to those pieces?

Abusers don't need motives, as it's not always something planned and calculated.

Nor do compulsive liars and nut cases. I'm open for all possibilities.

Both pictures and recorded instances of Spencer are present in the court documents. Of course to get a clear picture you'd have to see all the evidence, there are a lot of other things that paint the picture, but since you refuse to examine it - maybe because it contradicts your preconceptions? - I'll make it easy on you: pictures of bruises are on page 38. Page 39 is a transcript of a phone recording where Spencer asks his wife whether her parents will attend her funeral and pushes her into a stove. Page 51 where he threatens her to break her nose, again transcript of an audio recording. Page 54 a transcript of a phone recording where he tells her that she should kill herself.

Those pictures? Seriously? Can hardly make out anything at all.

Look, I am all fine and well with all this being used in a court case, where the evidence is examined by professionals, but I don't think mere transcripts (which might be tampered with, fake, and/or taken out of context) are enough to morally convict the guy of doing what he is accused of (namely, physical abuse). It doesn't look good for Spencer, and there's reasons to believe he got abusive with his wife. All I'm calling for is to have some patience and grace in letting him have a fair trial before crucifying him, or until it can be verified in another way. But somehow, that seems to be a problem with some of you.

[J.Yaxley]

There is bountiful evidence that Spencer has been abusive towards his wife. Nobody bases this "on nothing else than feminist (il)logic and religious female victimhood."

I was told by more than one individual in 2016 / 2015 that Spencer was unstable & abusive towards his wife. I chose not to spread those rumors because I knew there was a chance that guys who told me this were angry at Spencer due to the Spencer vs Greg Johnson battle royale. Imo, the fact that the the court documents appear to verify what I was told years ago is very damning.

[Schmetterling]

You should have made that clear, then. Still wouldn't prove physical abuse, though.

Abuse is not limited to physical, but there are other parts which prove physical abuse as well, like his threat to break her nose, and the bruises. That is why NP recommended to read the whole thing before making assumptions.

There's so much stuff in those documents that doesn't really have anything to do with the case or the accusations towards Spencer, and I'm not going to sieve through all of it. I read through most of it, though. If there's anything in particular that you think proves that he abused his wife, why not just refer to those pieces?

Because if I refer to a specific piece, like I did above, you will not be aware of the context and come up with statements like "but it doesn't prove something else". Everything needs to be put into context, there are accusations yes, but there is a basis on which those accusations are made. It is also not only about those specific accusations, but about establishing his character as a husband as a whole. Abusers fit a certain profile, e.g. they have anger management problems, feelings of entitlement, misogyny, etc. This is why stuff that one may find "irrelevant" or unrelated is being added, to make an image about their marriage as a whole. Some may find it irrelevant that his payment was overdue, for example, or that he asked her to pay for the groceries herself, but if you place it into context and there are repeated such overdue bills, in combination with him limiting her financial access, those are also signs of an abuser. Abusers usually make their victims financiall dependent on them, without personal, separate access to administrate the family finances. Or take the part where he tells her she is worthless, genetically inferior, a parasite, and so on. On its own you will say "but that doesn't prove anything", but if you put it into context, together with the other signs, if fits right into place. Abusers tend to talk down to their victims and make them feel inferior, they also make them feel dependent on them, e.g. "you are 35, no one will want you" aka "you're the only person you've got, better get used to it". When you are subjected to systematic criticism and belittling, you start to feel like you really are some or all of those things, it affects you psychologically. Also, "the only language women understand is violence", taken on its own you will say "but that doesn't prove he actually harmed her physically", "maybe it was an exaggerate hyperbole". But place it into context with the other behavior, and again, it fits right in. An abuser will use intimadations and threaten physical violence, and most abusers will resort to it sooner or later. Psychological abuse goes hand in hand with physical abuse. If you start to abuse your wife psychologically, the line between that and physical abuse is very thin.

But anyway, NP mentioned which pages you should look on for the specifics you asked.

Nor do compulsive liars and nut cases. I'm open for all possibilities.

So am I, but there is no evidence so far that she would be either of those. Saying that she is those because she is a woman would make as much sense as saying that Spencer is an abuser because he is a man. I'm sure you'd take issues with the latter, so why expect people to assume the former (which is essentially the same thing)?

Like the others, I rather base my impressions on evidence and the particular circumstances involved. She doesn't have a past of lying or gosipping, and so far the allegations she made about Spencer in the media have been true. She doesn't have a habit of snitching in the media either, and she has defended her husband on an ideological level. She blogs about conservative topics, has translated traditionalist literature from Russian and has helped Spencer with all his websites and work, so I think it's consequent to conclude that ideological spite can be ruled out as unikely.

On a personal basis, the one who looks more shady here is Spencer. Don't forget the pictures where he appears with his pro-gay girlfriend and the Tweets where he calls homosexuality "a kind of last stand of implicit White identity" or that one can have a male "soul" in a female body. Honest, or trying to impress his new girlfriend? Either way, it doesn't look very stable of him, personally or ideologically. Add to that all the exhibits submitted by his wife. Could one of them be exaggerated or embellished? Maybe. Could all of them be faked? Doubtfully. We also have the OP who has written that Spencer was vindictive and heard about the abuse from others years before this surfaced, and someone who dealt with abuse and recognized some of the signs.

But like I said, I am also open to be proven wrong. If you have anything that speaks against her, put the cards on the table.

Those pictures? Seriously? Can hardly make out anything at all.

Because they are black and white scans, obviously. You can make out in the first picture though, there is a bruise near her neck. Anyway, the point is, the court accepted them as exhibits. If they were/are fake, it should be pretty easy to prove. Same goes for the voice recordings. In fact, there are websites and software out there that analyze doctored photos. I'm pretty sure the police and courts operate with such or have their own experts to analyze the content.

Look, I am all fine and well with all this being used in a court case, where the evidence is examined by professionals, but I don't think mere transcripts (which might be tampered with, fake, and/or taken out of context) are enough to morally convict the guy of doing what he is accused of (namely, physical abuse). It doesn't look good for Spencer, and there's reasons to believe he got abusive with his wife. All I'm calling for is to have some patience and grace in letting him have a fair trial before crucifying him, or until it can be verified in another way. But somehow, that seems to be a problem with some of you.

He is not only accused of physical abuse. Like I said, domestic violence includes psychological/emotional abuse, especially if it is consistent. His wife also particularly mentioned persistent emotional abuse in addition to the physical.

If this were an immigrant who murdered and raped a European girl, and there was evidence to incriminate him, people would also have a verdict in their minds before the legal process was due. And I'm pretty sure you wouldn't come with the "innocent until proven guilty" defense. It's only because his name is Richard Spencer and he's a man, that makes you feel solidarity. Just as if it were the other way around, Spencer citing domestic abuse from his wife, I doubt you'd need to examine any evidence and tell people to be patient and wait for the court decision.

Anyway, I've said what it looks like to me, and I used particular statemets, I didn't say that there is zero possibility that I could be wrong. Of course we will know more once they decide in court. But even if he is found to be guilty by the court, there will still be people who will not believe it, because they will cite "the court's propensity for anti-male bias". Or maybe others could come up and say, well Richard's family is wealthy, they may have paid off the court. Or maybe they will reach a settlement, who knows. Obviously, unless someone has been there they can't put their hand into the fire and say they know first hand. I also can't say for sure that there aren't aliens hiding on the moon right now, because I haven't been there myself, and all is possible. But, as with most things, people make up their minds based on empirical evidence.

[Gefjon]

#BelieveWhamman!

Richard has done tremendous work in putting the Nationalist concerns of Whites across the globe to the forefront of public discourse and opinion, and helped create international networks for Nationalists, as well as arranging large events and public speeches.

What have you done?

He doesn't look to be a paid shill, unlike Spence, for one.

Been thinkin, this is probly all a calculated media scandal.

Spence, much like Trump, wouldn't be gettin' so much space in the mainstream media if he wasn't shillin' or sumthin. Spence, Trump, Alex Jones, the alt right, alt lite & co ain't the common folks revolting, it was all organized from the top. Innit a coincidence that many of them are pro-Israel? Look at Spence's old article. Look at parties like the AfD, who wanna safeguard the security of the Jews in Germany. They're either too blind and stupid to only recognize half of the story, or somebody's givin' them shekels. Again, 2+2, Zionists ain't gonna cooperate with the leftists on this, leftists support Palestinian rights, and are against apartheids. They want rainbow nations, and Israel doesn't want any rainbows inside its borders... They rather have them in white countries instead. Leftists, otoh, want them everywhere. They cheer for Ethiopian Jews, gay Jews and Palestinians just as much as they do for every other minority. They couldn't give a rat's ass about Jewish preservation, cause race doesn't exist and we're all gonna become some brown soup one day anyways.

Dontcha find it a lil bit strange that there's a sex scandal surrounding most of these alt-right figures? Start with Trump and his "stormy" relationships. How bout Matt Heimbach, The Trad Workers Party dude who was caught havin sex with one of his colleagues' wife and there was also a juicy story for the media? Does this look trad to ya?



What about Spence's new gf? Pro-fag, pro-tranny and a feminist to boot? That's what sealed the deal. Is that whom he dumped his trad wife, and the mother of his kids for? Cmon. Either Spence is one of them guys who thinks with his other head, and doesn't care whom he screws, or all of these folks are paid and probly laughing their asses off at us.

Plus Spence's folks are well off and live off govt money. They've probly got connections and know a few politicians here and there. It ain't like Spence made his money from alt-right stuff, money came from his parents from before.