Spicer: Hitler ‘didn’t even sink to using chemical weapons,’ although he sent Jews to ‘the Holocaust center’

In criticizing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's alleged use of chemical weapons, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Tuesday that even Adolf Hitler did not sink to that level of warfare, despite Hitler's use of gas chambers to kill millions of Jews.

When given the chance to clarify his comment — uttered during Passover, the most celebrated Jewish holiday in the United States — Spicer then said Hitler took Jews “into the Holocaust center” but that Hitler “was not using the gas on his own people in the same way that Assad is doing.”

Spicer brought up Hitler unprompted during Tuesday's White House briefing while emphasizing how seriously the United States takes Assad's use of chemical weapons.

“We didn't use chemical weapons in World War II. You know, you had a, you know, someone as despicable as Hitler who didn't even sink to using chemical weapons,” Spicer said. “So you have to if you're Russia, ask yourself: Is this a country that you, and a regime, that you want to align yourself with? You have previously signed onto international agreements, rightfully acknowledging that the use of chemical weapons should be out of bounds by every country.”


Later in the briefing, a reporter read Spicer's comments back to him and gave him the opportunity to clarify. Spicer's answer only added more confusion.

“I think when you come to sarin gas, there was no — he was not using the gas on his own people the same way that Assad is doing,” Spicer said, mispronouncing Assad's name. “I mean, there was clearly, I understand your point, thank you. Thank you, I appreciate that. There was not in the, he brought them into the Holocaust center, I understand that. What I am saying in the way that Assad used them, where he went into towns, dropped them down to innocent, into the middle of towns, it was brought — so the use of it. And I appreciate the clarification there. That was not the intent.”

When Spicer stumbled further into dangerous territory with this response, the mouth of one White House press aide, seated along the briefing room wall, seemed to fall open in a half gasp.

Before the briefing was even over, White House press aides had realized the magnitude of his mistake — and were working on a response to clarify it. Shortly after he stepped away from the lectern, Spicer put out a statement trying to explain what he meant.

“In no way was I trying to lessen the horrendous nature of the Holocaust,” Spicer said in the statement. “I was trying to draw a distinction of the tactic of using airplanes to drop chemical weapons on population centers. Any attack on innocent people is reprehensible and inexcusable.”

Spicer's comments at briefing sparked outrage and concern. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum tweeted a video showing footage taken when U.S. forces liberated the concentration camp in Buchenwald, Germany, in April 1945, documenting the atrocities witnessed. Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect and a frequent critic of the president, released a statement accusing Spicer of having “engaged in Holocaust denial, the most offensive form of fake news imaginable, by denying Hitler gassed millions of Jews to death” and called on Trump to fire his press secretary.



“I was obviously trying to make a point about the heinous acts that Assad had made against his own people last week, using chemical weapons and gas,” he said. “Frankly I mistakenly made an inappropriate and insensitive reference to the Holocaust, for which there is no comparison. And for that I apologize. It was a mistake to do that.”

Trump and several people close to him have previously faced accusations of anti-Semitism and making insensitive remarks regarding the Holocaust. During the campaign, Trump tweeted a graphic attacking Hillary Clinton that was circulating in anti-Semitic circles online that featured a Star of David on top of piles of money. Although the image was deleted, Trump later said he wished his staff had left it in place and allowed him to defend it.

After the election, the Anti-Defamation League’s chief executive opposed Trump’s selection of Stephen K. Bannon as his chief strategist because Bannon once led the Breitbart news site, which the organization considers “the premier website of the Alt Right, a loose-knit group of white nationalists and unabashed anti-Semites and racists.”

Politics newsletter
The big stories and commentary shaping the day.
Sign up
In January, the White House released a statement on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, which marks the anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp, that made no mention of Jews or the anti-Semitic views that fueled the Holocaust. At the time, White House spokeswoman Hope Hicks said the omission was intentional because the White House staff is an “incredibly inclusive group, and we took into account all of those who suffered.”

When confronting accusations of anti-Semitism, Trump and those close to him note that his daughter Ivanka, son-in-law and three grandchildren are Jewish. Ivanka Trump posted a family photo on her social media accounts Monday that appears to have been taken at the White House, along with the message: “During #Passover, we reflect on the significance of the exodus from Egypt and celebrate the great freedoms we enjoy today! #ChagPesach.”

On Monday night, the White House hosted a Seder dinner for staff members in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building’s Indian Treaty Room. Trump did not attend and tweeted: “Happy Passover to everyone celebrating in the United States of America, Israel, and around the world. #ChagSameach.” Obama held a Seder in the residence’s Old Family Dining Room all eight years he was president, a new tradition inspired by the Seder he celebrated with three young staffers during the 2008 campaign in the basement of the Sheraton Hotel in Harrisburg, Pa.

The Truth Behind trump's Syria Strike

The Real Story Behind The Syria Strikes 

I detest empty conspiracy theories. If the most straightforward logical explanation for something is well supported by the facts, then it’s probably true most of the time. But here’s the trouble with the events of the past forty-eight hours: none of it makes sense on its face. Not the gas attack in Syria. And certainly not Donald Trump’s response. I hate to say it, but these events only logically make sense if they’ve all been arranged by Vladimir Putin.
 Let’s start with the gas attack in Syria. In my view, the rebels lack the motivation and the organization to have been behind it. And ISIS was so weakened during the Obama administration that it now lacks the muscle to have pulled this off (and ISIS would be loudly taking credit if it did). And yet Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, genocidal as he may be, would not have done something like this without the approval of the Kremlin, because he is a longtime Russian puppet in both an economic and military sense.
 But Vladimir Putin knows full well that a gas attack like this was likely to prompt at least some kind U.S. military response against Assad. So Putin wouldn’t have been behind this unless he wanted the U.S. to take military action in Syria. And the only logical reason for Putin to want that is if he was trying to set up a win for Donald Trump, which could boost his historically low approval rating. It would also allow Trump to paint himself as being willing to go against Russian interests, as an argument against the most serious charges in the worsening Trump-Russia scandal.
 Moreover, the U.S. Tomahawk missiles used in the attack could have been struck down by the S-400 weaponry which Russia already had in place in Syria (source: Washington Post) – but Russia chose not to do so. Additionally, NBC News is reporting on-air that the U.S. strike only took out planes and fueling stations, while leaving the two airstrips intact. The airstrips would have required significant reconstruction, but the equipment can theoretically be replaced tomorrow.
 The U.S. attack seemed tailor made to look fierce to casual viewers at home, while inflicting as little real damage to Assad’s air force capability as possible. Trump went out of his way not to substantially impair Assad, and in return Russia went out of its way to allow the U.S. attack to happen. For that matter, Russia seemed to have already known what the U.S. would hit when it made the decision not to take out the incoming missiles. Regardless of any public jawing between the U.S. and Russia tonight, this reeks of carefully crafted military theater.
 Combine that with the reports this week from Rachel Maddow on her MSNBC show that the U.S. military had already been building up troops in Syria before the gas attack, and it strongly suggests Donald Trump knew he would soon be taking military action there. Further, Trump tried to keep the troop buildup a secret, suggesting he didn’t want anyone to figure out that he already knew the gas attack was coming.
 This is a hell of an accusation to make on my part. I’m suggesting that Vladimir Putin orchestrated a gas attack in Syria so Donald Trump could strike back in minimal and symbolic fashion, and that Putin told Trump ahead of time to go ahead and begin building up troops in advance, and that Trump went along with the horrifying stunt. And yet this is – incredibly – the least convoluted explanation that makes any logical sense.
 Whatever the real story behind the surreal events of the past forty-eight hours, which has cost the lives of Syrian children and has put U.S. troops in harm’s way, Donald Trump’s role in it must be investigated to the fullest. Because if my logical theory is even half right, then Trump just became a genocidal war criminal.

Keith Ellison Is A Well known Anti-Semite

If you go back to his positions, his statements, his speeches, the way’s he voted, he’s clearly an anti-Semite and anti-Israel individual.

 Keith Ellison had defended Nation of Islam bigots from Khalid Abdul Muhammed (“that old no-good Jew, that old imposter Jew, that old hooked-nose, bagel-eating, lox-eating… just crawled out of the caves and hills of Europe, so-called damn Jew”) to Joanne Jackson ("Jews are among the most racist white people I know") through a large section of his early adult life.

Keith Ellison spent a likely eleven years of his life affiliated with a racist and anti-Semitic hate group. Since then he has lied about it and distorted his past. That alone should be disqualifying.

The radical extremists supporting Keith Ellison's candidacy have no response to this. So they have simply resorted to repeating the same lies. With the aid of a compliant media that makes it very clear that it has taken Ellison's sideThe first Muslim elected to Congress has over several decades praised the Nation of Islam and its leader, Louis Farrakhan, who in the words of the Anti-Defamation League “has embarked on a wide-ranging campaign specifically targeting the Jewish community.” Ellison has recently expressed regret over his defense of Farrakhan in the 1990s, but Ellison’s own writings reveal that he has, at least at one point in the past, entertained a similar worldview.

“Whether one supports or opposes the establishment of Israel in Palestine and Israel’s present policies, Zionism, the ideological undergirding of Israel, is a debatable political philosophy,” Ellison wrote in 1990, protesting the University of Minnesota’s criticism of a campus visit by Stokely Carmichael, who famously claimed that Zionists collaborated with Nazis during World War II.

“The university’s position appears to be this,” Ellison continued: “Political Zionism is off-limits no matter what dubious circumstances Israel was founded under; no matter what the Zionists do to the Palestinians; and no matter what wicked regimes Israel allies itself with — like South Africa. This position is untenable.”

His writings and statements later in life suggest a consistency in this political belief well beyond the ‘90s.

“The United States’ foreign policy in the Middle East is governed by what is good or bad through a country of 7 million people,” he said at a 2010 fundraiser for his reelection hosted by a man named Esam Omeish, who had three years prior faced controversy for telling Palestinians that “jihad way is the way to liberate your land.”

“A region of 350 million all turns on a country of 7 million. Does that make sense? Is that logic?” Ellison continued. “When the Americans who trace their roots back to those 350 million get involved, everything changes. Can I say that again?”

During the same event, Ellison suggested the US foster closer ties with Saudi Arabia and Libya, which at the time remained under the dictatorial leadership of Muammar Gaddafi.

And in 2014, Ellison was only one of seven House members to vote against supplementary funding for Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system– a vote he cast during an emergency ballot, when the country was enduring over 4,000 rocket strikes by Hamas.

There is a pattern in Ellison’s statements and behavior, Jewish American groups are now asking Democratic members of Congress to block his appointment as DNC chair. 

“If you go back to his positions, his statements, his speeches, the way’s he voted, he’s clearly an anti-Semite and anti-Israel individual,” Haim Saban, a billionaire and Democratic megadonor who generously gave to Clinton this election cycle, said before a baffled crowd of top Democratic lawmakers in December, including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. “Keith Ellison would be a disaster 

”

The Anti-Defamation League has characterized Ellison’s past comments as “disqualifying.” 

If Ellison Is elected DNC Chairman I will leave the Party

Tomorrow the Democratic National Committee (DNC) will have to choose the direction of the Democratic Party, as well as its likely composition. It will be among the most important choices the DNC has ever had to make. There has been a powerful push from the hard-left of the Democratic Party, led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), to elect Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) chairman. If he is elected, I will quit the party after 60 years of loyal association and voting. I will become an independent, continuing to vote for the best candidates, most of whom, I assume, will still be Democrats. But I will not contribute to the DNC or support it as an institution. My loyalty to my country and my principles and my heritage exceeds any loyalty to my party. I will urge other like-minded people — centrist liberals — to follow my lead and quit the Democratic Party if Ellison is elected chairman. We will not be leaving the Democratic Party we have long supported. The Democratic Party will be leaving us! Let me explain the reasons for this difficult decision. Ellison has a long history of sordid association with anti-Semitism. He worked with and repeatedly defended one of a handful of the most notorious and public anti-Semites in our country: The Reverend Louis Farrakhan. And worked with Farrakhan at the very time this anti-Semite was publicly describing Judaism as a “gutter religion” and insisting that the Jews were a primary force in the African slave trade. Moreover, Ellison himself has made anti-Semitic statements. A prominent lawyer, with significant credibility, told me that while he was a law student, Ellison approached her and said he could not respect her, because she was a Jew and because she was a woman who should not be at a law school. This woman immediately disclosed that anti-Semitic and anti-feminists statement to her husband and friends, and I believe she is telling the truth. Ellison’s anti-Semitism is confirmed by his support for another anti-Semite, Stokely Carmichael. When there were protests about Carmichael’s speaking at the University of Minnesota, Ellison responded that: “The University's position appears to be this: Political Zionism is off-limits no matter what dubious circumstances Israel was founded under; no matter what the Zionists do to the Palestinians; and no matter what wicked regimes Israel allies itself with — like South Africa. This position is untenable." But the connections are more recent as well. In 2009, Ellison headlined a fundraiser for Esam Omeish, a former candidate for Virginia state delegate who had told Palestinians that “the jihad way is the way to liberate your land.”If With regard to Israel, Ellison was one of only a small number of Congress people who recently voted against funding the Iron Dome, a missile system used by Israel to protect its civilians against rocket attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah. His voting record with regard to the Nation State of the Jewish people is among the very worst in Congress. Ellison is now on an apology tour as he runs for DNC chairman, but his apologies and renunciations of his past association with anti-Semitism have been tactical and timed to his political aspirations. He first claimed to realize that Farrakhan was an anti-Semite when he ran for office in 2006 seeking Jewish support. His claim to be a supporter of Israel was timed to coincide with his run for the chairmanship of DNC. I do not trust him. I do not believe him. And neither should centrist liberal supporters of Israel and opponents of anti-Semitism. The DNC has a momentous choice this weekend. It can move the party in the direction of Jeremy Corbyn’s labor party in England, in the hope of attracting Jill Stein Green Party voters and millennials who stayed home. In doing so they would be giving up on any attempt to recapture the working class and rust-belt voters in the mid-western states that turned the Electoral College over to Donald Trump. Jeremy Corbyn today could not get elected dog catcher in Great Britain. I do not want to see the Democratic Party relegated to permanent minority status as a hard-left fringe. Remember what happened when the Democrats moved left by nominating George McGovern, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis — all good men. The total combined electoral votes for these candidates would not have won a single election. There is no reason to think the country has moved so far to the left since those days that the Democrats can win by pushing even further in the direction of the hard left. The self-destructive election of Keith Ellison will be hard to undo for many years. So, tomorrow, the Democrats must choose between electing Ellison or keeping centrist liberals, who support Israel, like me and many others in their party. I hope they choose wisely. But if they do not, I have made my choice. Alan M. Dershowitz