Neo-Nazi Leader Outs Ron Paul???

The leader of the American Nationalist Socialist Workers Party has a post at a neo-Nazi site, the Vanguard News Network, alleging that Ron Paul has been regularly meeting with white nationalists. The post reads:

Ron Paul Lies About Lack Of Involvement With White Nationalists


I have kept quiet about the Ron Paul campaign for a while, because I didn’t see any need to say anything that would cause any trouble. However, reading the latest release from his campaign spokesman, I am compelled to tell the truth about Ron Paul’s extensive involvement in white nationalism.

Both Congressman Paul and his aides regularly meet with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review, and others at the Tara Thai restaurant in Arlington, Virginia, usually on Wednesdays. This is part of a dinner that was originally organized by Pat Buchanan, Sam Francis and Joe Sobran, and has since been mostly taken over by the Council of Conservative Citizens.

I have attended these dinners, seen Paul and his aides there, and been invited to his offices in Washington to discuss policy.

For his spokesman to call white racialism a “small ideology” and claim white activists are “wasting their money” trying to influence Paul is ridiculous. Paul is a white nationalist of the Stormfront type who has always kept his racial views and his views about world Judaism quiet because of his political position.

I don’t know that it is necessarily good for Paul to “expose” this. However, he really is someone with extensive ties to white nationalism and for him to deny that in the belief he will be more respectable by denying it is outrageous — and I hate seeing people in the press who denounce racialism merely because they think it is not fashionable.

Bill White, Commander
American National Socialist Workers Party

This report is via Little Green Footballs and those who are interested can follow the redirection there to see the original post (allowing me to refrain from giving them a direct link).While we cannot be certain of the validity of anything posted at VNN, LGF’s account of what is posted there is accurate. This could really be a case of a neo-Nazi who takes offense to Paul sharing his positions but denying them in public, or this could be a dishonest statement made with other motivation.

Under normal circumstances I might ignore such a post but Paul’s own behavior, and the behavior of his supporters, makes it impossible to ignore such a charge. If Paul had returned the contribution from Stormfront founder Don Black, if Paul’s newsletter didn’t include racist writings (which he subsequently said others wrote under his byline) or if I didn’t receive so many racist and anti-Semitic comments here in response to posts about Paul, I might be more tempted to give Paul the benefit of the doubt. Even if the claims here are not true, this demonstrates why it was a tactical, as well as ethical, mistake for Paul to refuse to return the contribution from Black (or donate the money to charity) once it was made public. Any serious candidate would have returned such a contribution, and Paul has more reason than most to need to disassociate himself from such organizations.

Be Sociable, Share!


  1. 1
    Devin says:

    With all the information available so far I think this is a bogus claim. This site pretty much debunks the whole restaurant link
    and the rest of LGF’s “evidence” is unconvincing.

  2. 2
    Ron Chusid says:

    No time to look thru this right now but I wanted to get the link out quickly in case it really exonerates Paul. The evidence at LGF does pretty much come down to the claims in this statement.

  3. 3
    Gene Trosper says:

    I stopped reading LGF a few months back because their particular and narrow style of partisanship leads them to make outrageous charges, no matter how flimsy the “evidence”. They simply can’t be trusted for good information.

  4. 4
    imp says:

    I find it disturbing that you would believe anything that a Nazi would say.

  5. 5
    Ron Chusid says:


    This really doesn’t have much to do with LGF’s credibility (or lack of credibility). They are legit here in terms of what they reposted. The question is whether the claims of a neo-Nazi leader can be believed.

  6. 6
    Ron Chusid says:

    Looking at the link above it doesn’t totally debunk the claims (but there is no easy way to prove a negative–that Paul has not met with these groups). Paul would have been much smarter to have returned Black’s contribution as soon as it became an issue to avoid being open to such charges.

  7. 7
    Ron Chusid says:


    “I find it disturbing that you would believe anything that a Nazi would say.”

    I find it disturbing that you would mischaracterize this post in such a manner.

    First of all, note that I am reporting his account along with caveats that possibly it should not be trusted.

    Secondly, it is simplistic to simply assume that nothing a Nazi would say could ever be true. If a Nazi told you it had started to rain outside, would you automatically go out without your umbrella, assuming that if a Nazi says it is raining it could not be? If a Nazi says who they met with, they could be telling the truth. They could also be lying. Unfortunately for Paul, he has foolishly left himself in a position where we cannot just assume that these statements about him are untrue.

  8. 8
    Galileo Galilei says:

    At least he did not meet with the femi-nazis.

2 Trackbacks

Leave a comment