In a group conversation that was recently made public, it came out that Paul Ingrassia, a Republican figure, described himself as harboring a “Nazi inclination.”
This revelation is just one of the numerous current signals suggesting that such extreme and inflammatory language is becoming more usual among certain promising Republican employees.
However, Ingrassia was not merely some MAGA provocateur; he was President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Office of Special Counsel before he rescinded his candidacy. And during his period in the administration thus far, he has functioned as a de facto “loyalty enforcer.”
Related
- The revealed Young Republican group chat indicates a larger issue
Already facing examination due to his ties with antisemitic individuals and outrageous public statements, the group chat released to Politico this week exposed several other unpleasant remarks made by Ingrassia, notably: “Never have faith in a chinaman or Indian,” reflections on the “natural condition” of “Blacks,” and a demand to have Martin Luther King Jr Day “removed.” Ingrassia also employed an Italian insult to refer to Black individuals, went so far as to claim that “the founding fathers erred in saying that all men are created equal,” and stated: “I do have a Nazi bent in me from time to time, I will acknowledge it.”
Even though he eventually pulled out of the running, Ingrassia’s impact on the administration has already been observed — he’s aided in screening prospective appointees and staffing two significant bodies.
He started the year as a kind of allegiance guarantor for Trump within the Department of Justice, when he made highly inappropriate requests that those in contention for prominent FBI positions share their voting background with him. This is according to a legal action brought by three dismissed FBI figures, one of whom recounted being questioned by Ingrassia in January with inquiries such as “Who did you cast your ballot for?” “When did you begin supporting President Trump?” and “Have you voted for a Democrat in the past five election cycles?”
According to ABC News, Ingrassia acted as the White House liaison for DOJ, possessed “considerable power to contribute to interviewing and picking candidates for roles at senior and subordinate levels,” and characterized himself as Trump’s “eyes and ears” at the department.
However, he soon entered into conflict with other Trump designates there, and toward the conclusion of February, he was reassigned to the Department of Homeland Security, where he occupied a comparable post (and was accused of sexually harassing a female associate, by arranging a business journey for them and making sure she’d have to share accommodations with him).
Throughout all of this, Ingrassia displayed an exceptional endurance within Trumpworld. He demonstrably had protectors in elevated positions within the administration. And the narrative of his ascent reveals a great deal about the peculiar moral landscape of Trump’s second administration.
How did Ingrassia gain prominence in Trumpworld?
Ingrassia was a comparatively insignificant individual on the right throughout Trump’s initial term. He anchored a right-leaning podcast (together with his sister, another Trump appointee), served as an intern with the White House’s National Economic Council, and was granted fellowships at the Claremont Institute, an increasingly impactful right-wing brain trust.
During the 2020 electoral cycle, he circulated an item published by his podcast’s handle urging Trump to implement the “martial law choice” to hold onto power. The article was signed “Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus,” a Roman personage whom, as per CNN, Ingrassia has repeatedly made reference to.
Having finalized his law degree at Cornell in 2022, Ingrassia became a part of a legal practice that provided representation to a number of January 6 demonstrators. He further became involved within the New York Young Republican Club (yes, the same grouping from the previous week’s group chat controversy).
However, it was during 2023 that Ingrassia deciphered the approach to truly capture Trump’s attention. An aspect involved writing obsequious pro-Trump pieces on his Substack and at MAGA publications — articles that in some way managed to reach Trump’s notice, prompting him to share them on TruthSocial. The other aspect required regularly visiting Mar-a-Lago and Bedminster, where he came across Trump face-to-face.
In 2023, Ingrassia obtained (and circulated) multiple communications dispatched to him by Trump, scribbled on Ingrassia’s articles or social media postings, occasionally making mention of having lately encountered him (and labeling Ingrassia as handsome and good-looking).
- “Paul – thanks, you are great!”
- “Paul – Great seeing you at Bedminster. Young + handsome.”
- “Paul, great seeing you. The man behind the great writings – you are looking good.”
It’s tough to exaggerate the degree of servility in Ingrassia’s public pronouncements concerning Trump — along with his declared readiness to endorse almost anything Trump may do to attain power. He has circulated portraits of Trump depicted as a monarch, voiced that Trump would be the defender of Western culture, and posted on X: “Trump is the constitution.”
“I WILL ALWAYS SUPPORT DONALD JOHN TRUMP, THE 45TH AND 47TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!” he put up in May 2024 – securing another: “Paul – you are great” remark from Trump. In 2024, Ingrassia fulfilled a duty in Trump’s campaign, aiding in coordinating rallies and fundraising activities.
Simultaneously as he was gaining traction in Trump’s sphere, Ingrassia also defended some of the most questionable personalities on the right. For instance, he provided legal services for “manosphere” personality Andrew Tate (supporting in organizing his conversation with Tucker Carlson).
Ingrassia further contended in 2023 that the antisemitic, Hitler-advocating commentator Nick Fuentes ought to have his account reinstated on Twitter. The subsequent year, a reporter observed Ingrassia at a Fuentes gathering, even though Ingrassia professed to have stumbled upon it unintentionally.
Within a conventional administration, associations like these would likely have been disqualifying — intercepted during a vetting procedure. However, none of this was of consequence. All that held importance was that Ingrassia displayed loyalty — completely, absolutely, and entirely to Trump in person. That’s the singular prerequisite he needed.
Update, October 21, 7:25 pm ET: This piece was initially released sooner on October 21 and has undergone revisions with details regarding Ingrassia’s withdrawal of his nomination.
Source: vox.com
