Rep. Ted Lieu plays Candace Owens' Hitler remarks on phone during House hearing on white nationalism

Originally published at:


OF COURSE nationalists will kill their own people; specifically the opposition. Night of the long knives, anyone? What a dishonest hack.


I am a victim
I am not a victim
You are victimizing me
I am a victim
I am not a victim
Your facts are victimizing me
I am a victim
I am not a victim
I am not responsible for my own words
I am a victim
I am not a victim
Stop pointing out the irreconcilability of my views
I am a victim
I am not a victim
I never said that
I am a victim
I am not a victim
You’re part of the conspiracy


“I do not believe that we should be characterizing Hitler as a nationalist.”…uhm well then you need to go back to high school for a remedial history lesson. Nazism was first and foremast an extreme nationalist ideology. That is a basic historical fact, proved by the most cursory of research. I find it deeply troubling how so many apologists for the Trump administration are bent on rewriting history in this way. This seems to be flying under the radar to some degree and must be called out on every occasion. Trump supporters routinely parrot the line that Hitler was a socialist for instance, falling for the propaganda that included even the official Nazi Party name (National Socialist German Worker’s Party). They also love to claim that the United States it not a democracy but rather a Republic, not understanding that it can be both. Where is this crap coming from? It is paving the way for authoritarianism.


I know nothing about the back story to all of this, but what I did note was that the chairman managed to interpret “Mr Lieu believes black people are stupid” as Owens directly calling Lieu stupid. For him to make such a fundamental error makes one question his competence to chair such a hearing.


Now, now. Clearly, by opposing the nationalists, these traitors have marked themselves as enemies. You’re not saying we should avoid killing enemies, are you?!

1 Like

oy vey.

he quite obviously wanted to shutdown the attack on lieu, he didn’t have perfect recall but cited her inflammatory statement as best he could in the moment.

if she were honest, she would have have corrected him by restating what she had said. but, she didn’t she instead said lieu called her “despicable” – he didn’t. he didn’t say anything remotely like that. ie. she attacked him again.

it’s a trolling tactic to attack the person not the argument.

why defend her?


This thread exposes Republicans using DARVO .


I have to admit I don’t know Candace Owens before this because there are only so many outrageous people that one can keep track of.

I do not know Ted Lieu either before this.

Without knowing anything of either and looking at what I saw, had I not listened to what was played in the phone call I would be very confused as to why someone would respond that way.

If there was a very long conversation that was cherry-picked, to prove an opposite point, it wouldn’t be the first time someone has done that…

Except what I heard basically said Hitler was not a nationalist, and that it only became a problem when he went outside of Germany.

That is crazy talk, nationalism is exactly what caused the deaths of many Jewish people and otherwise, because the definition of nationalism is when you feel your country and people are superior to all others in the literal sense.

The Nazis were fascist not socialist, try to find anyone that actually believes North Korea is democratic just because they put Democratic People’s Republic in the name.

Nationalism has a definitive meaning that is well known even if it doesn’t always directly lead to mass genocide, it did in the case of the Nazis and fascism is a defined term too.

I think this is a case that is dangerous because someone who is not well educated could miss the danger here and I think that is what one of the first commentators did- either because they simply don’t know any better or they are defending this stupidity.

The congressman that played this voice message did the right thing and the woman who responded to her own words is utterly full of shit in a dangerous way. If you are not sure why, play this clip in front of a history professor.


Nazis, call them out.


This thread exposes Republicans using DARVO

I’d guess that’s about half of everything Trump says.


Sure, but what I think she and other goose-stepping Trumpkins are trying to claim is that a nationalist simply puts their own country first. They’re trying to redefine nationalist as synonymous with patriotic. Which is, yeah, idiotic, but I think that’s why she also says that going global is where Hitler went wrong.


What is most odd to me is that she seems to forget what Nazi stems from, which is Nationalsozialistische.


The old X couldn’t possibly be a White Nationalist because they’re Y trick.

(I’d suggest educating Don jr that Farrakhan is cult leader and not really Muslim, but he seems to have inherited the Impossible-to-Educate gene from his father.)


Just another take on the hearing / shitshow.




i think you’re spot on.

lots of people assert there is an “american exceptionalism” – not due to historical circumstances but because we are just so perfect. ( which dovetails into white supremacy, and the us being the highest point of some theoretical “western culture” ) so in that sense, for some people, “patriotism” and “nationalism” would be synonymous cause we are the best :tm:.

and this is the whole thing of missing the forest for the trees. she promulgates this idea of wrong idea of nationalism, sure. but even ignoring that.

somehow it would have been okay if the nazi’s had only killed german jews? because that is on its own horrific. murdering people to achieve some farcically pure homeland. and doubly so because that’s exactly what white nationalists want in the states.


Well no, I don’t think she quite means that either. She does say Hitler was horrific and so on. He just shouldn’t have gone global. Cuz that’s not sticking to your own country.

Again, stupid as all get out, but we might as well stick to what she seems to be saying. She’s not saying it’s good that he was genocidal. (And no, I’m not trying to defend her, nor anything she’s saying.)


I think she may have lost the argument by trying to express how her views, while very similar to Hitler’s have some minor distinctions in scale.