Ex-Antifa member slams Nadler for calling far-left group 'imaginary': 'That's just false'
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Former Antifa member responds to Rep. Jerry Nadler's claim that radical group is 'imaginary'
Gabriel Nadales, former Antifa member, responds on 'The Ingraham Angle.'
Gabriel Nadales, a former member of Antifa, responded on "The Ingraham Angle" Friday to House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., calling the group "imaginary" earlier this week.
"That's just false," Nadales said of Nadler's claim. "I mean, the only thing that's imaginary here is Representative Nadler's sense of justice. I mean, the protests I attended ... weren't imaginary. Also, the windows that I regrettably broke, they weren't imaginary.
"Yet every single time that we have left-wing politicians ... that deny and ignore and even justify Antifa violence, it's only going to continue to grow."
Nadler made the claim Thursday during a debate in the House on Democrats' proposed police reform legislation.
"They couldn't utter the phrase 'black lives matter' and could barely [broach] the subject of police reform," Nadler said of House Republicans. "Instead, their amendments ... were errant nonsense, off-topic, dealing with imaginary things like Antifa and completely negating the entire purpose of the bill."
Nadales told "Ingraham Angle" host Tammy Bruce he was "indoctrinated" before he joined Antifa by Spanish-language media and his teachers to believe "America was my enemy, not because America rejected me, but because I kept being told that I was a victim."
"Thankfully, I started asking questions about this movement. And then, really I ... got the information that I needed and I realized that being part of it was something that I should've never been part of," Nadales said. "And now I'm glad that I'm condemning it. But one thing to remember is, where is Antifa really coming from? Because Mr. Nadler thinks that it's imaginary. Well, it's coming, oftentimes, from college campuses."
Nadler's comment on the House floor Thursday drew an angry response from Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, the Judiciary Committee's top Republican.
"They're not imaginary, they're real ..." Jordan said. "To have the chair of the Judiciary Committee, on the House floor, say ... these words ... 'imaginary things like Antifa.' They are far from imaginary. And there are people in every major city in this country who know that and yet the chair of the Judiciary Committee just made that statement. That is scary."
Fox News' Nick Givas contributed to this report.
Tags
Who is online
48 visitors
Nadler joins the list of left wing cucks and apologist that claim ANTIFA doesn't exist, Hillaryious.
You go ANTIFA. Burn them liberal shitholes down.
ANTIFA is just an acronym for a loosely associated group of anarchists and unaffiliated anti-fascists who appear to like punching Nazi's and occasionally vandalizing property.
They are not a political party or even a measurable movement. They are not affiliated with any political party except in the minds of partisan morons and the fascists they're punching in the face.
Anti-fascists exist as do anti-communists, but "ANTIFA" does not exist as any actual discernable group with verified members, just self-anointed anti-fascists who claim to be "chapter" Presidents like some loosely affiliated gang.
I do not condone ANTIFA, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for any crimes they commit, and thankfully they have not killed anyone. They cannot, however, be put in the same classification as right wing extremists that murder dozens and dozens of Americans annually and are obviously the far more deadly domestic terror threat.
"ANTIFA is just an acronym for a loosely associated group of anarchists and unaffiliated anti-fascists who appear to like punching Nazi's and occasionally vandalizing property.
They are not a political party or even a measurable movement. They are not affiliated with any political party except in the minds of partisan morons and the fascists they're punching in the face.
Anti-fascists exist as do anti-communists, but "ANTIFA" does not exist as any actual discernable group with verified members, just self-anointed anti-fascists who claim to be "chapter" Presidents like some loosely affiliated gang.
I do not condone ANTIFA, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for any crimes they commit, and thankfully they have not killed anyone. They cannot, however, be put in the same classification as right wing extremists that murder dozens and dozens of Americans annually and are obviously the far more deadly domestic terror threat.
Agree 100% DP
What would some do without Anti-Fa as their scapegoat?
Can you be sure they haven't killed anyone...how do you know for sure. And do you have anything to support your claim about so called right wing extremists?
First, one would have to provide evidence that ANTIFA has any actual members, not just the loosely associated anarchist groups that come out with masks to punch Nazi's and fascists. If that was proved and there was any evidence of an ANTIFA member killing anyone it would be plastered all over the news and repeated by this dumb fuck President hourly. So that's how I know for sure that so far, the opportunistic anarchists haven't killed anyone. Apparently someone got stabbed by a supposed member, but then anyone anywhere who wants to claim association with name ANTIFA just claim membership without having to actual become a member of any group.
Yes, and have posted it many times so it's shocking you're not aware of all the right wing violence in this country. Perhaps the right wing news you watch avoids discussing it because it hits too close to home for many of their right wing loyalists.
" Right-wing extremists were linked to at least 50 extremist-related murders in the United States in 2018 , making them responsible for more deaths than in any year since 1995"
" Domestic right-wing terrorist groups often adhere to the principles of racial supremacy and embrace antigovernment, antiregulatory beliefs. Generally, extremist right-wing groups engage in activity that is protected by constitutional guarantees of free speech and assembly."
" On the national level, formal right-wing hate groups, such as the National Alliance, the World Church of the Creator (WCOTC) and the Aryan Nations, represent a continuing terrorist threat"
" Right-wing groups continue to represent a serious terrorist threat. Two of the seven planned acts of terrorism prevented in 1999 were potentially large-scale, high-casualty attacks being planned by organized right-wing extremist groups."
" Since 9/11, white supremacists and other far-right extremists have been responsible for almost three times as many attacks on U.S. soil as Islamic terrorists , the government reported. From 2009 through 2018, the far right has been responsible for 73% of domestic extremist-related fatalities"
It really does amaze me when we have SO much evidence of right wing terror and fucking Nazi's marching in our streets chanting "Jews will not replace us!" and yet still, sniveling right wing apologists come out to defend and deflect while attacking left wing groups that have no such blood on their hands.
If anyone is still in denial about the threat of right wing extremists, perhaps one should ask themselves why they doubt the mountains of evidence. Is it perhaps because they have a soft spot for bigots and white supremacists? Do they find them less threatening because the right wing extremists are usually only killing minorities and not folk who look and talk like others on the right? Do they dismiss the violence as unimportant because it likely didn't happen against a white Christian? I don't see any other reasons why those on the right continue to deflect any responsibility from right wing extremists who are just taking their ideology one step further than complicity.
" Antifa ( / æ n ˈ t iː f ə , ˈ æ n t i ˌ f ɑː / ) is an anti-fascist political movement in the United States comprising a diverse array of autonomous groups that aim to achieve their objectives through the use of both non-violent and violent direct action rather than through policy reform".
)
"ANTIFA" is a "movement". How exactly do you hold a "movement" accountable? How do you hold dozens of autonomous groups responsible for what some random person in a mask does at a protest? Arrest those using violence or vandalism, hold the individuals who do such things responsible. That is all you can do when there is no head of the snake to chop off. That's all anyone is saying when they question the actual existence of "ANTIFA" when framed the way right wing media proclaims it to be, as if it's some cohesive left wing group they can parade around in effigy to stir up their scared shitless fearful base. Rational persons don't see it as an actual solid entity that can be held accountable for anything and is only used by the right wing as a scapegoat to pin all their faux outrage on. What they're really scared of is losing their white Christian majority so they look for anything they can use as a cudgel to beat the left over the head with, even though ANTIFA has no affiliation or association with Democrats or any other left leaning political groups, campaigns or BLM. But facts don't matter to rabid right wing extremists who push that kind of bullshit narrative.
[deleted]
Of course, but anyone who rejects its claims without a single bit of contrary evidence is the one who should be laughed at. Please try and dispute a single thing in the statement I quoted from wiki.
Oh, and by the way, that meme you always use when you've got nothing is getting old.
Did I ever say it was "imaginary"? No. As a "movement" it does exist, it's just not some entity or LLC run by specific persons that can be held accountable. How is this so fucking hard for those on the right to understand?
Yep, Jerry "No Nads" Nadler engaging in the two things he excels most at, being totally clueless and totally useless!
Does Nadler live on this planet?
Well, of course Nadler is going to say this. He can't very well have congress address Antifa because he needs them. They are doing what he wants them to do. If he pretends they don't exist, he doesn't have to address it in congress. What will be interesting to see is, if the Dems get the trifecta (shudder!), what antifa's role will be going forward. Will they suddenly become the Dem's enemy or will they continue to use them to bring us closer to socialism? You know, brown shirts? Morality police? Something along those lines?
I don't believe this guy Nadales. Anti-fa isn't really an 'organization'.
Now Tessylo, just because they have no membership list, leadership list, meetings, hierarchy, or news coverage prior to Charlottesville doesn't mean they don't exist.
After all, if they didn't exist, who on the left would the right wingers be able to compare to the neo-nazis, skinheads, proud boys, white nationalists, etc?
You adding that to your service as a ANTIFA apologist?
Because it is in Wikipedia? That's your definition of evidence that it is real????
You want to prove it is real? Link me 5 news articles, citing "antifa", PRIOR to Charlottesville.
Couldn't find any huh? I'll give you a clue, there exists 1 article that specifically references "antifa" prior to Charlottesville. It didn't exist until right wingers needed to make something up to try and balance the Charlottesville neo-nazi groups with.
Your argument is also false, "antifa" NOW exists, but only as a label for right wingers to use, to try and distract from the right wing racism everyone else can plainly see.
clue, there exists 1 article that specifically references "antifa" prior to Charlottesville
First, that argument is nonsensical.
second, it’s completely false.
Are you unable to read my comment? It is in English, and I used relatively small words. Let me repeat:
Your argument is also false, "antifa" NOW exists, but only as a label for right wingers to use, to try and distract from the right wing racism everyone else can plainly see.
For you, you are correct. But you may want to try the whole reality thing every now and then. Those of us that stick with reality, find it illuminating.
Prove it! Link the articles.
Made up by the right wing. Disagree? Prove it.
So does bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster. So you are claiming they are real now?
Is Harry Potter real, since he has multiple books, websites, and a flag?
Https://www.harrypotter.com
As an organization, it DOES NOT exist.
As a label, it does exist.
Don't even engage him, let him wallow in it.
Anybody but a ANTIFA apologist know the facts. The RCA (Rose City ANTIFA) has been raising hell in Portland Oregon since 2007.
But yeah the apologist like to spew shit like ANTIFA doesn't exist. I guess some people need to research more.
And wow they call themselves a organization...shocker.
There are literally hundreds of references to antifa in newspapers before Charlottesville. Get a subscription to Lexis Nexis and they are there to see:
July 3, 2016 Sacramento Bee:
It was a melee between neo-Nazis, who had been given a permit for a rally on Capitol grounds, and a loosely organized group of anti-fascists, or "Anti-fa" that came armed to shut down the rally.
October 13,2016 Louisville Courier Journal:
"Louisville Antifa joins cities such as New York, Chicago and Philadelphia in providing a counter point the"
July 1, 2016 Jackson Sun
The counter protesters hailed from such leftist groups as By Any Means Necessary and Antifa Sacramento. Antifa stands for anti-fascist.
December 10, 2016 Philadelphia Enquirer:
"South Jersey Antifa described itself as a group of concerned citizens outraged"
June 29, 2016 Sacramento Bee:
"Hundreds of so called anti-fascists -self dubbed "Antifa-" descended upon Capital Park and started a brawl"
I look forward to your retraction of this silly argument
Even Stalin would flinch at the sort of blatant denial of reality we see taking here.
Staying with a reality which you have no evidence that shows it being real? That's not reality...
Except I'm the one asking for facts, you're the one refusing to provide any to support your claim.
Why did you just state a lie to support your argument? I have stated multiple times that I believe "antifa" exists, but only as a label.
When, where? You have refused to provide any proof of that.
Then provide the comment # where you provided this "evidence".
How about the fact that they regularly get a bunch of like-minded people to show up at events in the name of Antifa? Seems pretty organized. You don't need corporate headquarters and a tax return to be an organization.
"How about the fact that they regularly get a bunch of like-minded people to show up at events in the name of Antifa? Seems pretty organized. You don't need corporate headquarters and a tax return to be an organization."
Where and when are these 'events' happening?
Let the twisting begin.
OK, I'm not Google or Wiki, but here are a few articles about their activities.
FBI, Homeland Security warn of more ‘antifa’ attacks
"Early 2016." That would be the Obama administration. So it's not like Trump invented them in his mind.
Portland Police Chief Says Antifa Protesters Used Slingshot to Launch Urine and Feces-Filled Balloons at Riot Cops
Black-clad antifa members attack peaceful right-wing demonstrators in Berkeley
Antifa swarms America First! rally against illegal immigration in Laguna Beach
Antifa protester gets 18 months for beating up Trump supporter
Antifa group shares link to list of 1,600 ICE employees alongside photos, locations, and job titles
Antifa group chants outside, vandalizes Fox commentator Tucker Carlson's home
I said prior to Charlottesville. Did you forget that all you articles are dated??? Do you understand that 2018 and 2019 comes AFTER 2017?
Not to mention that it is only FoxNews and other right wing news sources that apply the label "antifa" to these "like minded people". Of course, by that standard we can call all Trump supporters KKK members.
That's not true. You clearly did not read the articles I linked to if you can say this untruth and not grow a longer nose. I linked to 7 stories and not one of them was FoxNews. They included liberal sources like the Washington Post, NBC, and the Los Angeles Times.
When it comes to Fox news .... they have Jan Bradyitis
Nor were they prior to Charlottesville, which was the only stipulation I stated.
Which I already proved your statement was bullshit. I linked a ANTIFA webpage but of course you chose to ignore it, you wouldn't want to be proved wrong on your ANTIFA apologist talking points now would you.
So let me guess, in liberal math 2007 is after 2016 right?
You proved nothing, and have attempted to prove nothing, your claim is empty. You have yet to even address my statement with any facts.
Wow you just cannot stop this fib, huh? I will post it again:
If they are an organization, where is their headquarters? Who is their leader? Who is organizing them? I've seen numerous different leaders of anarchists groups proclaiming they are anti-fascists and some even claim to speak for the movement, yet few of the other autonomous groups follow their lead if ever, they are all doing their own thing, making their own decisions. The only thing they have in common is a basic stated goal of pushing back on fascists and fascism.
The fact is, ANTIFA is no more an organization than the Boogaloo's. They are a movement that seeks to further a specific agenda. For the Boogaloo movement, they are violent opportunists who are trying to use others fight for equality to ignite a race war that they imagine they and other right wing extremists will win and re-establish their desired "white culture". For the ANTIFA movement, they are also violent opportunists who are using protests as an opportunity to fight back at what they see as rising right wing fascism here in America. Neither are organizations, they are both autonomous "movements" that individually organize their own actions or activities towards a collective objective.
Autonomous: adjective - having the freedom to govern itself or control its own affairs.
Movement: noun - a series of organized activities working toward an objective.
ANTIFA is just the less violent, though likely larger, version of the Boogaloo's. The Boogaloo's have already taken that step into being domestic terrorists by killing police and protestors.
I condemn any groups or movement that uses violence to further it's agenda. I am not here to defend ANTIFA and I hope any of those autonomous group members or leaders that have either committed or incited violence and vandalism are arrested and held accountable for their crimes. I also hope those autonomous Boogaloo group members or leaders who commit crimes or incite violence are arrested and held accountable for their crimes. Based on the evidence I've seen and read, it's obvious that the Boogaloo movement is by far more violent and more likely to kill innocent Americans than ANTIFA. But even though I want a criminal who vandalized some public property to pay for their crime, I'm far more desirous of a murderer to be caught and punished, thus I find the right wing Boogaloo's and other right wing extremists groups that are responsible for dozens and dozens of deaths each year to be held accountable for their actions and their ideology of white supremacy condemned.
In regards to ANTIFA I can only condemn their violence and vandalism, I cannot condemn their ideology of wanting to stomp out fascism. I believe there are some, perhaps even here, who feel almost the same about these two movements but in reverse, which is why they are quick to condemn everything about ANTIFA but tend to drag their feet in any condemnation or even recognition of right wing extremist groups, perhaps because in their hearts they cannot condemn the right wing ideology of supporting white nationalism and protecting some fantasy "white culture".
I feel the same. I present facts, you present opinion, there is no point if you continue to refuse to accept facts. If you can provide any evidence of ANTIFA being an organization with a headquarters and leaders, then by all means, provide them. It is clear by your response however that you do not want to engage in this debate because the facts are not on your side.
I already said it was a "movement" which is real, I have merely pointed out the fact that it is not an organization. I think Nadler was wrong to claim it was "imaginary" though if he meant it as in there is no such actual organization as ANTIFA then he was correct, but the way he said it left it open to interpretation which made him look foolish.
Organization: noun - an organized body of people with a particular purpose, especially a business, society, association, etc.
ANTIFA exists as a movement, plain and simple, with numerous autonomous groups using the name (no one had to authorize their permission since there is no actual ANTINA organization they have to get approval from) to push a collective anti-fascist agenda. If you can prove otherwise then please do so, but until then you're the one refusing to accept facts in this debate.
The facts are clear, only those living in a reality of their own making continue to reject the facts for their preferred warped conservative fantasy realm.
You are making my point for me. They are not "ANTIFA", they got no approval, they simply declared themselves anti-fascists and showed up to oppose what they see as the rise of right wing fascism. They also do not approve or disapprove other groups using the name or claiming themselves anti-fascists because ANTIFA is a movement, not an organization you have to contact to become a member.
Did I ever say that each autonomous group weren't organized? There are dozens of similar groups around the country and none of them take orders from any centralized ANTIFA leadership, they manage their own affairs on their own turf and make their own decisions. Some use violence and vandalism, others simply wear black masks and shout at the Nazi's marching in our streets.
I get that it's just easier to believe that it's all just one big gang you can blame for any and all violence at protests, but they are not. I don't agree with the disparate autonomous groups methods, I do not endorse or condone these groups, but they are not part of some larger ANTIFA organization, they are a coalition of groups who are part of an anti-fascist movement.
They obviously know already since they aren't claiming to be ANTIFA but merely a self-proclaimed Portland affiliate of the anti-fascism movement.
Wise choice.... some folks just like to argue.
Way to avoid ever having to present any facts, just run from the debate claiming you won. I accepted facts from the very start and presented many, you presented none, just your opinion that ANTIFA is an organization. The facts prove you wrong, and because you can't support your premise and cannot prove ANTIFA has a headquarters or centralized leadership you use a childish cop-out to claim victory.
Organization: noun - an administrative and functional structure (such as a business or a political party)
The ANTIFA movement does not meet that definition. They are not an organization. They would meet the definition of at best a coalition.
Coalition: noun - an alliance for combined action, especially a temporary alliance of political parties forming a government or of states.
Even the dictionary agrees.
ANTIFA: noun - an anti-fascist movement .
ANTIFA: noun - Antifa is a left-wing political movement , made up of various autonomous groups, that opposes fascism and other right-wing ideologies, often through militant protest tactics.
And you're right, there is no point to continuing a debate if one side refuses to accept facts and it's beyond clear that I have presented the facts and you've chosen to walk away because you have none to support your side of the argument.
Kinda like Al-Qaeda then.
Al-Qaeda: noun - a radical Sunni Muslim organization dedicated to the elimination of a Western presence in Arab countries and militantly opposed to Western foreign policy: founded by Osama bin Laden in 1988.
" Al-Qaeda , Arabic al-Qāʿidah (“the Base”) , broad-based militant Islamist organization founded by Osama bin Laden in the late 1980s."
Who was the founder of ANTIFA again? Where did they originate and where is their headquarters? Who is their leader?
Why is that important?
The internet? I don't know. Why is that important?
The UN doesn't have a leader, but I wouldn't say they are not organized.
Why do you keep trying to look at details that don't matter? Why are you focusing on "organization" when the allegation was that they were "imaginary?" Can't you address the topic?
The secretary-general of the United Nations (UNSG or just SG) is the head of the United Nations.
Leader synonyms: chief, head, principal, boss
Because it's one of the defining characteristics of an organization which separates it from a general movement.
I work in insurance, and if you are going to sue someone or some organization, you have to find out who they are and where their headquartered before you can claim they caused you some financial or bodily harm. If you were to sue ANTIFA where would you go? Who do you hold responsible?
I did that already, though it's clear you haven't read my comments.
As I said above "I already said it was a "movement" which is real, I have merely pointed out the fact that it is not an organization. I think Nadler was wrong to claim it was "imaginary" though if he meant it as in there is no such actual organization as ANTIFA then he was correct, but the way he said it left it open to interpretation which made him look foolish."
Hardly. He's an appointed administrator and spokesman. His authority is limited and he is easily removed. He's not the boss of anybody.
So if there is a founder it's an organization, and if there isn't it's not an organization? Where are you getting these definitions and what does this have to do with Antifa being imaginary?
That distinction exists for a reason. If you want to some antifa person for wrongdoing, you can sue that person. Also, if you can identify anyone who helped him commit that wrondoing, you could sue them too. Businesses have people who function as agents on their behalf (usually employees), so you can sue the person or the business.
However, an individual can be part of organization and yet acting without the authority (agency) of the organization. In that case, you would just sue the individual.
None of that has to do with whether or not Antifa exists or has some level of organization and coordination. You are trying to take a gray area and make it black and white. There is identifiable coordination on the internet that clearly drives hundreds of people to demonstrate on the streets of Berkeley or Portland. You can't ignore that.
I may not be able to identify where the wind comes from but it has clear effects that show me it's real.
Kinda like Al-Qaeda then.
Actually, unlike Antifa, Al-Qaeda has a well defined leadership infrastructure.
Any kid with a black mask and T-shirt can join in and pretend to be antifa.
Ya gotta love the anonymity. Wish we'd have thought of that in the 60s.
Of course the problem then being false flag operations to make antifa look bad which is exactly what happened in the Minneapolis riots. The proud boys on bikes were doing the damage and looting.
Are there examples of them looking good? If they're so good, why was the Obama administration warning state and local officials about them? And why would they describe their activities as “domestic terrorist violence” ?
Blockading Nazi's was a pretty good look for them, but I still disagree with any of them that used any violence or vandalism. Just sitting in the road and being an obstruction to marching Nazi's and confederate flag waving bigots is enough to expose the fascists and display ones personal disagreement with fascism and worthless scum bag racists.
See post 1
See post 8
Some people educate themselves on a subject others wallow in their ignorance of a subject.
Right, because then they wouldn't have internet accounts for people to follow; a gun organization for people to ask questions of; or a handbook on how to organize.
Antifa has been around a lot longer than Charlotte. The media just chose to ignore them.
They sound really disorganized. No way they could ever assemble enough people to become a real threat./S
What would make it an organization and why does that matter?
Anyway, he didn't say it wasn't an organization. He said it was imaginary.
So if it isn't an organization, and he said it was imaginary, how could he have been a former member?
Or are you being tongue in cheek?
Not that I care either way . . .
I don't know. This was your distinction. I'm just trying to understand it. Is any group of people who think of themselves as members properly called an "organization?" Does any of this matter?
Like I said, I don't care one way or the other.
[deleted]
I don't think that you are capable of seeing and perceiving the level of organization among them, since most of goes on underground and on the Dark Web. But they not just isolated independent groups of agitators.
I'd like to know who finances them, provides the commercial grade fireworks, pallets of bricks, baseball bats, etc.
Why don't you look it up on the Dark Web?
I said Nadales