Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri boldly confronted the Left’s narrative of political violence during a recent Senate hearing. He took less than two minutes to dismantle the claim that both sides share the blame for such violence. The session focused on FBI Director Kash Patel’s capabilities, but Schmitt redirected the conversation to address a persistent hypocrisy.
Schmitt started strong, questioning the Left’s usage of labels like “extremists,” “MAGA Republicans,” “fascists,” and “Nazis” directed at conservatives. “Check yourself. Don’t give me this both sides nonsense,” he declared, setting the tone for what was to come. He pointedly challenged Patel to categorize several high-profile violent incidents as either left-wing or right-wing motives.
The senator did not hold back in how he presented his argument. He referenced the Congressional baseball practice shooting, where a gunman nearly killed House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, and asked Patel whether it stemmed from left or right-wing violence. Patel confirmed it was the former. Schmitt continued, mentioning the riots that engulfed cities during the summer of 2020. He pointed out, “Burned down cities during the summer of love in the George Floyd riots. Left-wing violence or right-wing violence?” Though Patel hesitated, it was clear Schmitt’s intent was to hammer home the contrast between the violent acts he listed and the perceived narrative of equal culpability.
He then laid out a series of additional examples, each tied to political violence on the Left. Schmitt highlighted incidents like the Waukesha Christmas Parade massacre and the Covenant School shooting in Nashville. He methodically classified each case as left-wing, reinforcing his argument with evidence. “Now, of course, the culmination of this vile trend—a left-wing assassination,” he concluded, underscoring the real danger of political violence from one end of the spectrum.
Schmitt’s delivery resonated, leading him to criticize the prevailing gaslighting on political violence, often perpetuated by those in the media and political elite. His assertion was clear: if unity is sought, it must be built on honesty about the sources of violence. “Free speech, yes. Political violence, no,” he stated firmly. This powerful exchange exemplifies the division within political discourse in America, where accusations and labeling often eclipse genuine dialogue.
The implications of Schmitt’s remarks extend beyond the hearing room. They highlight a growing frustration among some politicians regarding the way political violence is discussed and portrayed. Schmitt’s bluntness not only calls for accountability but also challenges narratives that ignore the facts on the ground. His stance provides a clear reminder that recognizing the roots of violence is essential for fostering true unity in political conversations.
"*" indicates required fields
