Hodges massively self-owns – by revealing far-right loved him at Robinson rally


Right-wing, Corbyn-obsessed columnist Dan Hodges has a matchless record – of being spectacularly wrong. This has resulted in the hapless Mail writer being owned a number of times on social media, with a thread by ‘The Candidate’ author Alex Nunns standing out particularly.

But yesterday he managed to own himself, which is even better.

Hodges tweeted his pride at being shown on screen at a rally by far-right figure Stephen ‘Tommy Robinson’ Yaxley-Lennon, badging himself a hate-figure:

This self-congratulation suckered some other anti-Labour trolls into joining in:

Unfortunately for Dan, it turned out that he had been on-screen, not as a hate-figure for the far-right gathering, but in approval at something negative he had said about campaign group Hope Not Hate:, as ‘kipper’ and Robinson fan Gerard Batten told him:

So ‘Desperate’ Dan had been put up as a poster-boy for the right-wingers, not as a hate figure.

Oh dear. As self-owns go, it’s a fairly spectacular one.

Seems Dan would be well advised to stick to his primary hobby of spouting ill-judged bile against Jeremy Corbyn.

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. The absolute effing density.

    There’s ‘gormless’ , but hodges abuses the term. Nowt but a colossal helmet.

  2. Oh, and it’s bad enough these twunts** on Tv beginning every bastard sentence with the word ‘so’…

    …But doing it in writing/typing?

    Get in the bloody bin!!

    **Twunts what do that are usually academics, I guess ‘density dan’ thought it’d make him look clever if he did it on twatter.


  3. To paraphrase one of my favourite Daily Mail columnists Peter Hitchens. ‘there is something wrong with our society when all MSM can obsess about is the leader of the opposition’.

    1. Regardless of what rag he writes for, Hitchens is about the only mainstream pundit worth listening to from whichever side of the political spectrum you find yourself on, in my opinion.

      He might not be right on everything, but he was the only one who said there needs to be a significant shift to the left within labour to give people a real, discernible choice in politics because we’ve had the same thing since 1979 and people have been badly short changed because of it.

      And he was bang on the money, wasn’t he? Oh, and he gets bonus points for his demolition job(s) on the infantile russell brand.

    2. I thought that might get attention. Peter Hitchens is my ‘favourite’ columnist because I may fundamentally disagree with much of what he says & why, he invariably requires me to question. Unlike many columnists, he will often post articles that beg me to think rather than merely accept & agree!

  4. Oh dear he is now quite literally a “Fascist Poster Boy”. That should please his mum.

  5. I’m fascinated by the way in which the ‘anti-semitism’ trope is unwittingly endorsed by the left.

    I noted the following in ‘The Canary’ :

    “It’s crucial that Labour, and the left in general, realise there’s a problem with antisemitism.”

    *Any* real antisemitism represents a ‘problem’ in the widest sense and should be dealt with. That’s a given. But the Party has mechanisms to do so, and universal agreement that this should be the case.

    So why the needs to constantly forefront the ‘problem’ when *real* evidence suggests it’s less of a ‘problem’ in the Labour Party than elsewhere??

    In terms of specifics, where we know details, it is the victims of false accusation that seem to be a major injustice ‘problem’ for the Party. Cases in which the term ‘antisemitism’ has been stretched so far as to render it meaningless to suit purely political ends.

    1. There is no problem with A/S in the party. Hypocrites, fraudsters and defamers are present in abundance.

  6. The following is a chronicle of a number of events relating to Jeremy Corbyn by John Marsh (which someone posted on the JVL website):

    In 2015 Jeremy Corbyn stood as a candidate for the leadership of the Labour Party. Not once, did any of his rivals, or anyone else, accuse him of Antisemitism. Although The Jewish Chronicle accused him of associating with Anti-semites, Holocaust deniers and terrorists they wrote, “Although there is no direct evidence that he has an issue himself with Jews.” Corbyn appointed Luciana Berger as Shadow Minister for Mental Health. In 2016 Berger, along with most of the Shadow Cabinet, resigned. Her resignation letter Stated

    “You have served with great principle and have shown me great kindness and courtesy since appointing me.” Once again there was no mention of Antisemitism.

    Margaret Hodge and Ann Coffy tabled a motion of no confidence in Corbyn, as Labour leader. Hodge did not accuse Corbyn of Antisemitism but, according to Wikipedia said.
    “This has been a tumultuous referendum which has been a test of leadership … Jeremy has failed that test”. Subsequently, 172 MPs voted against the Labour leader, however, not one accused him of Antisemitism. During the ensuing second leadership election, there was still no accusations of Antisemitism.

    However, 40 female Labour MPs did write an open letter, to Corbyn, asking him to deal with issues relating to online abuse. The Guardian’s political correspondent Mike Walker wrote, the women sought four commitments from Corbyn:

    “To hold regular meetings with the women’s parliamentary Labour party group; to issue an “unequivocal statement” condemning actions such as demonstrations outside MPs’ surgeries; to “actively challenge” any intimidating behaviour; and to hold colleagues accountable if they attend events where threatening slogans are used, including on posters and T-shirts.” Once again there was no mention of Antisemitism.

    Martin Kettle of The Guardian wrote that “many Labour MPs, even some who face defeat, want an early election” to prove decisively that Corbyn’s Labour is unelectable as a government. Unelectable but not Antisemitic.

    In 2017 a General Election was called and with a radical and popular Manifesto Labour polled 40% of the vote. During the campaign Corbyn was accused of many things, “a terrorist sympathiser” amongst them. However he was never accused of Antisemitism. With 40% of the vote, a Corbyn lead Labour party was a realistic possibility. Suddenly, a vociferous anti-racist campaigner becomes an Anti-semite?


    Anyway, today the Smear Machine appear to be going with “the enemy within”, or at least the Sun is. Haven’t checked to see if it’s getting full-on coverage yet, but no doubt it is:


      1. My view is foreign policy is the main reason for the assault on Corbyn.
        Here’s historian Mark Curtis from 2nd January 2019 “Will Jeremy Corbyn be able to transform UK foreign policy?”

        I don’t think it’s just Blairites who oppose changes to foreign policy in the Labour party. There are ‘good causes’ and ‘bad causes’ amongst parts of the ‘left’ as well. Syria being a prime example which is also closely tied to Israel’s interests along with US et al. I believe foreign policy is at the heart of British establishment power and class nexus.

      2. Apologies, I misquoted the title of Mark Curtis’ article in my comment @ 9.15pm, the correct title is “Will Jeremy Corbyn be able to transform Britain’s Middle East policies? “.
        The focus of the article is Middle East policies not foreign policy in general..

  7. Whoops, what a plonker!

    For a moment I thought Hodges might be considered too ‘left wing’ for his employers at the “Daily Heil”

    But no, despite his embarassment, his job is secure at the publication that infamously proclaimed, “Hurrah for the Blackshirts” some 80 years ago.

  8. why is he ALWAYS wrong, lol.

    Thanks for this article! Hope all those congratulating him in the replies to his tweet, including blue tick accounts, and Rach Riley who liked Emma P’s tweet, simply as a way to attack Corbyn/Corbynites by going along with Dan ‘s analogy, become aware of this and are left red faced. Just shows.

    Has he or any of them acknowledged the actual truth?

    Tweet from Ezra Levant telling Dan that Tommy Robinson was quoting him approvingly


  9. In replies people were using his false tweet to try to say Tommy Robinson supporters and Corbyn supporters were somehow the same… And how great Dan must be to be “a target” of both…

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: