[guest post by Dana]

I don’t know. On one hand, good for her acknowledging she was wrong, and offering an apology. But on the other hand, the woman is 47 years old! She’s just now learning what an incomparable horror the Holocaust was?? At the very least, it would seem that this is a rather serious indictment on Georgia’s public schools:

Last month, QAnon believer and freshman GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene appeared on a conservative podcast, where she compared the COVID-19 safety protocols put in place by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi—members must continue to wear masks on the chamber floor—to the treatment of Jews in Nazi Germany during the Holocaust. On Monday, Greene asked for forgiveness during a press conference she held after a visit to the Holocaust Museum, and began by reminding the assembled reporters that she is “very much a normal person.” “I think it’s important for me to always be transparent and honest,” Greene said, adding that her late father “taught me some great things.”

“And one of the best lessons that my father always taught me was when you make a mistake, you should own it,” Greene continued. “And I have made a mistake and it’s really bothered me for a couple of weeks now. So I definitely want to own it. This afternoon, I visited the Holocaust Museum. The Holocaust is—there’s nothing comparable. It happened, you know, over 6 million Jewish people were murdered. More than that, there were not just Jewish people, Black people, Christians, children, people that the Nazis didn’t believe were good enough, perfect enough. The horrors of the Holocaust are something that some people don’t even believe happened, that some people deny, but there is no comparison to the Holocaust. There are words that I have said, remarks that I’ve made, that I know are offensive. And for that I want to apologize.”

Marjorie Taylor Greene: “I have made a mistake… this afternoon I visited the Holocaust Museum. The Holocaust is- there’s nothing comparable to it.” pic.twitter.com/skrF6YyC3u

— Andrew Solender (@AndrewSolender) June 14, 2021

Here’s the thing: I have trouble understanding how a U.S. Representative who graduated from a state university never fully comprehended the scope and impact of the Holocaust until age 47.

Nonetheless, the timing of MTG’s statement is coincidental given that she is facing a censure resolution. She and Rep. Omar, that is. The latter coincidentally issued her own “clarification” for her anti-Semitic comments last week:

Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar will be the target of dueling resolutions expected to be filed this week admonishing them for remarks that critics said were antisemitic or inappropriate.

Rep. Brad Schneider, D-Ill., is expected to unveil a resolution Wednesday that would censure Greene, of Georgia, for remarks last month comparing House mask rules to the Holocaust.

…

Separately, Schneider led a group of House Democrats last week who publicly criticized fellow Democrat Omar, of Minnesota, accusing her of giving “cover” to terrorists and suggesting her remarks reflect a “deep-seated prejudice.”

Omar later clarified her comments in which she appeared to equate the U.S. and Israel with Hamas and the Taliban. Schneider said afterward that he was satisfied with her response.

The clarification by Omar, however, didn’t satisfy Republicans, who have frequently sought to cast her as indicative of a deeper antisemitic sentiment in the Democratic Party.

Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., is leading an effort to craft resolution to censure Omar. It will also censure other members of the so-called squad, Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., for “defending terrorist organizations” and blames the trio for recent antisemitic attacks in the U.S., according to a Banks spokesman…

Omar, Ocasio-Cortez and Tlaib, a Palestinian American, have all made statements criticizing the Israeli government and U.S. support, which have been met with criticism. In 2019, the House voted to condemn antisemitism in response to statements made by Omar, but the resolution did not name her…

Your elected officials at work.

–Dana

In January, Chip Roy of Texas claimed that he believed Trump had committed impeachable offenses, but rationalized a vote against impeachment by blaming Nancy Pelosi for drafting the articles in a way that targeted Trump’s speech rather than his actual offenses:

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said on the House floor that Trump’s conduct in pressuring the vice president to overturn the election impeachable, but that he opposes the article of impeachment.

“The president of the United States deserves universal condemnation for what was clearly, in my opinion, impeachable conduct, pressuring the vice president to violate his oath to the Constitution,” Roy said.

He said he is against the impeachment measure because it makes an issue of political speech.

This always seemed to me like a politically convenient excuse, from someone who is ambitious and didn’t want to cross his constituents, who would view any vote to impeach as tantamount to treason. When Chip Roy was one of the first out of the gate to condemn Liz Cheney, my opinion was confirmed. Her opinions were hardly out of bounds, if you actually believed that Trump committed impeachable offenses, and ought to have been impeached if only the Democrats had written the articles correctly.

Today John McCormack publishes a piece that makes it clear to me that I was right all along. Oh, how I love to have my confirmation biases gratified!

But why did Roy, who said in January that Trump had clearly committed an impeachable act, think it was so offensive for Cheney to say Trump shouldn’t have a role in the party?

“That an action was condemnable — that an action was impeachable — doesn’t mean necessarily it should be impeached,” Roy said.

“It’s kind of like there are sins in the Bible for which you might leave a spouse — you know, committing adultery, for example. That doesn’t mean that the marriage should fall apart,” he added. “What I think we’ve got to do is work with the president and work with our entire coalition of Republicans behind four years of a really strong agenda and move forward.”

Rationalization City USA, population this guy.

It’s lovely that Roy was willing to condemn Trump for a brief period of time. But it’s not good enough.

Ironically, on the flip side of the coin, his cravenness on impeachment and Cheney may not have been good enough for Trump, who demands unquestioned loyalty at all times in all situations. Just ask Mike Pence. McCormack says someone may be exploiting Roy’s lack of full obsequiousness to primary him:

But is there any reason to believe Trump’s prediction of a Roy primary loss (which reads more like a threat) will come true? Matt McCall, who lost to Roy 47.3 percent to 52.7 percent in the 2018 GOP primary runoff, certainly hopes so.

“I have asked Trump for his endorsement to run against Chip Roy. If Trump endorses, I will run, and we will kick Chip Roy’s ass,” McCall told National Review in a phone interview. “I’ve approached [Trump’s] team. Steve Bannon, I think, is working on that for us.”

Ultimately, McCormack seems to think Roy will be OK. But wow, it would be a shame if his willingness to go in the tank for Trump, but only part of the way, was not enough for the Vindictive Retired Guy in Chief.