Dec 5, 2023
Texas Republicans IMPLODE In Secret Nazi Vote Revelations
The executive committee of the Texas Republican Party get caught after they attempted to remove a vote from records, which reveals how each member voted to reject an official ban on the party associating with Nazi sympathizers. John Iadarola and Viviana Vigil break it down on The Damage Report.
- 6 minutes
State leaders on both sides of the island,
Texas,
are now condemning a vote by the Texas
State Republican Executive Committee,
that's the board that governs the Texas
Republican Party, for their ridiculous
own goal over condemning anti-Semitism,
Nazis, and Holocaust deniers.
[00:00:17]
So what's basically going on is that this
executive committee has been struggling
and failed in dealing with language over
a new resolution affirming the party's
commitment to combating anti-Semitism.
So the context for this nationally is
that we're in this very brief window,
[00:00:32]
thanks to the conflict between Hamas and
Israel, where the Republican Party needs
to pretend that they have
an issue with anti-Semitism.
As soon as that's not in the news anymore,
they'll go right back to hanging out with
Nick Fuentes and
loving Marjorie Greene and all that.
But for right now, they want to pretend
that they don't like anti-Semitism.
[00:00:48]
So they were going to do this.
They have this anti-Nazi
language in this measure, and
that got watered down before it
was ultimately rejected entirely.
But it had stated, be it further resolved,
that the Republican Party of Texas have
[00:01:04]
no association whatsoever with
any individual or organization
that is known to espouse anti-Semitism,
pro-Nazi sympathies, or Holocaust denial.
That resolution ultimately
passed unanimously Saturday, but
only after the language on associated
with neo-Nazis, Holocaust deniers and
anti-Semitism was removed.
So, look, that's a little bit confusing,
but basically,
[00:01:22]
they had a strong version that
got weakened and then it passed,
but only once the part that
mattered was taken out.
So they had this opportunity to tell the
country, or at least their state, we don't
like Holocaust deniers, we don't like
Nazis, we don't like any of that stuff.
And they decided no.
[00:01:38]
And in a separate move, by the way, which
this is not getting as much reporting, and
I find that to be crazy,
roughly half of the board tried to prevent
a record of their vote from being kept.
So they voted to get rid of that stuff.
And then they tried to hide
the fact that that's what they did.
[00:01:53]
They didn't want to be on the record for
having removed that stuff.
So, look, they're going to present
themselves as taking a principled
stand on specific versus vague language,
which we'll talk about.
But then why do you need to remove
the record of your vote if you were being
[00:02:09]
principled?
So we're going to get into that and some
of their arguments for why they had to do.
But first of all, it would seem like this
is a fairly easy thing to do, Viviana, but
what do you think about.
>> I mean, I think we're really
getting into the rhetoric and
know semantics of language.
Obviously, we should all be against
anyone who's denying the Holocaust,
[00:02:27]
anyone who's pro-Nazi,
any anti-Semitic language or
feelings or
sort of legislation that promotes that.
And so
it's important to get the words right.
So I understand they're
trying to be particular, but
it does seem a little suspicious.
And I didn't know that, John,
that they wanted it in secret ballot.
[00:02:44]
Let's all just put it on a paper and
don't say who said know.
And then it's interesting to me.
I mean, it's also very indicative that
these are the same people that will
vote to increase the United States
military contributions towards
[00:03:01]
Israel's fight against Hamas and
the Palestinian people.
So they're pro-Nazi, but also pro-Israel,
which to me just underscores that
it has nothing to do with religion.
It's not anything to do with religion.
[00:03:16]
Nazis, they don't make any sense.
They're just walking hypocrites and
contradictions.
So we can't really make any sense
of what they're trying to do.
I don't know why these legislators
would want to protect that language so
close to their heart.
It's very concerning to me what
they're trying to hold on,
[00:03:33]
what they're trying to allow people to do.
If somebody comes in and they're actively
denying that the Holocaust happened,
we don't want any part of that.
That's easy, why is that being contested?
It's confusing to me.
So we're in a weird place right now where
people don't really know how to support
[00:03:50]
free speech, but yet
we don't want to put it in paper,
and we don't want to put our hand up and
say that we do.
So it's a lot of cowardly behavior,
actually.
>> 100% cowardice, and even if you accept
their arguments, which I'm going to
briefly read for you, it just requires
a little bit more thought and attention.
[00:04:07]
So they say, you cannot really define,
tolerate, and it could really cause a lot
of people, especially our leaders,
a lot of trouble down the road with it,
which makes their leaders sound bad,
but they say it's a slippery slope.
Then they go on to say,
who decides what antisemitism is?
Who decides what association is?
Who decides what is is?
[00:04:23]
I added that when it's
a Clinton reference.
But anyway, who decides when it crosses a
line where we give up our association with
these people?
So, look, that is not 100% wrong in that.
Yeah, associate, I guess,
could mean different things.
And look, there's a lot of behavior and
language and stereotypes and attacks and
[00:04:41]
smears and memes and tropes that I
think it's very easy to be like,
that's anti- Semitic,
but they're not wrong.
That I guess some people try to lump
other stuff in there that I think
it's very arguable, I suppose.
And what does associate mean?
Okay, I guess, then just put out
a statement strongly condemning these
[00:05:00]
things, you did nothing in the end rather
than do a little bit more thought and
a little bit more work and then send
a strong signal against anti-Semitism.
And that's why it makes me feel like this
is not fundamentally about language.
This is about not turning off
people that they know support them.
[00:05:15]
I'm not saying that every one of
these Republicans supports Nazis, but
every one of these Republicans
knows that Nazis support them.
And look, we've covered.
I'm not going to relitigate everything.
Their statements, their associations,
the people they go on podcasts with,
[00:05:30]
the conferences they go to, their
militias that they provide cover for,
the Jews will not replace us
good people on both sides.
Come on, do we really need to go back
over a history of multiple years of this?
The fact that they can barely even pretend
to care when synagogues get fire bombed
[00:05:47]
and shot up?
Like, no, they're against anti-Semitism
right now when it comes to Hamas.
And that's pretty much it.
It ain't that difficult to be
consistent about it anyway.
>> Speaker 2: Yeah, you got it, John.
>> Speaker 1: You're
getting a lot of criticism.
>> Speaker 2: It can't be
said better than that.
[00:06:02]
>> Speaker 2: It's upsetting,
it's upsetting because it
should be that simple.
>> Speaker 1: Like you just said,
you would hope,
especially considering mistakes.
[MUSIC]
Now Playing (Clips)
Episode
Podcast
The Damage Report: December 5, 2023
Hosts: John Iadarola Guests: Viviana Vigil
- 11 minutes
- 6 minutes
- 5 minutes
- 6 minutes
- 9 minutes