MSNBC’s Wallace: Seems ‘Obvious’ Domestic Violent Extremists Part of Right’s Voting Coalition

MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace said Tuesday on her show “Deadline” that it seems “obvious” domestic violent extremists were a part of the right’s voting coalition.

NBC News national security contributor and former FBI Assistant Director Frank Figliuzzi said, “There is another takeaway from today’s domestic terrorism hearing, and that is, I think the far-right position on domestic terrorism and any steps toward mitigating the threat really was encapsulated by Senator Ted Cruz.”

He continued, “You know, we had a long hearing today that really spent a valuable amount of time talking about white replacement theory and how radicalized people have become to violence from that. And then it’s Ted Cruz’s turn, and what does he say in that context of radicalized rhetoric, violence, radicalization processes? He says three things. Violence is really bad, and people who are violent should be prosecuted. What he hinted there, and what’s been inferred from that, is, all violence is the same. We don’t need any special laws to address violence. The guy who hits a guy over the head on the sidewalk is the same as somebody who shoots people up because they’re black at the supermarket. Violence is violence. It’s bad. Number two, hate’s really bad. We should despise hate. Number three, here’s the semicolon that’s important, number three, but we don’t need the federal government controlling political ideology. So, who’s talking about political ideology here? We’re talking about white replacement theory and violence. And he’s equating that with political ideology that can’t be controlled by the government. That’s a message. White replacement theory has become political ideology.”

Wallace said, “Frank, if Mr. Whitfield’s mother was killed by foreign terrorists, the Democrats and the Republicans on the committee would be promising him the moon. What is — I mean, is it as obvious as it seems that domestic violent extremists are an important part of the voting coalition on the right? I mean, what is the structural impediment to pardoning the homeland against domestic violent extremism?”

Figliuzzi said, “So, we heard the issues again ad nauseam today, which are important. There is a clear distinction in treating domestic terrorism as a threat because of the First Amendment, Freedom of Speech. We don’t want to police ideology — freedom of Assembly. We don’t want to monitor people’s discussions, chat, groups, backyard barbecues. We can’t have that. So, we seem to walk away from the whole issue because we seem unable to take on that challenge. But you’re absolutely right. The threat is domestic. We should be treating it like an international terrorism.”

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN