admin
Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker recently insisted on national television that he “has never suggested” President Donald Trump is Hitler, and MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace backed him up by claiming she doesn’t believe any Democrat has made that comparison. That denial was delivered less than a week after Pritzker drew an explicit parallel between Trump administration immigration enforcement and Nazi Germany, a remark that lit up social media and conservative outlets.
The raw footage and archival statements tell a different story, however, undermining the governor’s sudden protestations of innocence. Pritzker has invoked Nazi-era rhetoric multiple times in speeches and interviews, at moments explicitly comparing Trump and Republican tactics to what happened in 1930s Germany — and critics on the right quickly unearthed those clips. Conservatives aren’t being paranoid when they point to the tape; they are pointing to the record.
This is textbook political theater: Democrats hurl the gravest possible accusation, then act shocked when anyone points out the historical parallels they themselves drew. TheWrap and other outlets have cataloged similar invocations by senior Democrats, which makes the sudden denial look less like decency and more like damage control. Americans should reject both the casual weaponization of Holocaust language and the transparent attempt to rewrite recent remarks when it becomes politically convenient.
The stakes go beyond petty hypocrisy. When political elites toss around “Hitler” and “Nazi” as routine campaign shorthand, they cheapen real historical evil and normalize a political culture that rewards outrage over facts. That rhetorical escalation has real-world consequences, and conservatives are right to warn that reckless language can inflame an already polarized nation instead of calming it.
Fox commentators and other conservative voices were right to call out the double standard: the same people who lecture about civility and truth will happily use the most extreme analogies until it suits them, then feign wounded innocence. This isn’t a debate about tone alone — it’s a fight over who gets to define patriotism, who gets to play offense with history, and whether mainstream institutions will hold public officials accountable for reckless speech.
If anything positive can come from this circus, let it be a renewed demand for consistency and accountability in political discourse. Voters should insist that leaders debate policy, not perform rhetorical stunts; reporters should keep the tape rolling; and elected officials of every party should be forced to answer for incendiary language when it appears on video. The American people deserve better than political theater dressed up as moral outrage.
