Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-Texas) doubled down Wednesday on his decision to doxx 44 San Antonio area Trump donors on Twitter, saying it was simply a “lament” that will hopefully lead Trump supporters (and others around the country) to “think twice” about donating to the president’s reelection campaign.
The Texas Democrat is the campaign chairman of his brother Julián Castro’s Democratic presidential campaign.
In his tweet Monday night, Castro wrote: “Sad to see so many San Antonians as 2019 maximum donors to Donald Trump — the owner of @BillMillerBarBQ, owner of the Historic Pearl, realtor Phyllis Browning, etc. Their contributions are fueling a campaign of hate that labels Hispanic immigrants as ‘invaders.’”
Although Castro claimed on MSNBC’s Morning Joe that his tweet was merely a “lament” to address his disappointment that these San Antonians were funding a campaign of hate, most on the right believe its real purpose was to disseminate an enemies list for leftists inside and outside of government to harass and bully the president’s donors.
As host Joe Scarborough indicated in a couple of tweets yesterday, he fully supports Castro’s decision to doxx the Trump donors because they are “complicit” in spreading the president’s “white supremacy.”
Any business that donates to Trump is complicit and endorses the white supremacy he espoused in Charlottesville, with his “send her back” chants, and by laughing at shouts that Hispanic immigrants should be shot. Donors’ names are on FEC reports. They are newsworthy.
— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) August 6, 2019
If your business funds Trump’s campaign, then you are supporting white supremacy.
Look at his rallies.
Listen to the chants of “Send her back!”
Hear the calls of “Shoot them!”
Your money funds that.
Your business supports that.
You are complicit.
— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) August 7, 2019
While he condemned the president’s immigration stances and rhetoric, MSNBC’s Willie Geist was not convinced that Castro’s enemies list was a good idea.
He asked the congressman what the objective of publishing the names of Trump donors actually was.
“What do you hope will happen to the 44 private citizens whose names you posted. Do you want people to boycott their companies, protest outside their homes? What’s the goal here?”
Castro denied that spurring protests and boycotts against the donors was his goal and insisted that his post was only meant as a “lament.”
“It was meant to draw attention to the fact that there are a lot of people in our community who are respected by San Antonio who are contributing to this guy who’s using their money to fuel hate,” he said. “What I hope is that this has started a conversation about what exactly Donald Trump is doing with these people’s money.”
At this point, Castro, while using eliminationist rhetoric meant to demonize President Trump and his supporters, gave the game away.
“And I hope that these donors in San Antonio and donors throughout the country, unless you support the white nationalism and racism Donald Trump is paying for and fueling, then I hope you as a person of good conscience will think twice about contributing to his campaign,” he explained.
Castro’s admission that the intention of his tweet was to strike fear in the hearts of potential Trump donors was not lost on Geist, who pointed out that people are probably already being harassed.
“What do you say to those people, this morning?” he asked Castro. “Do you want them to repent their support for Donald Trump? What do you want from them?”
Castro denied unconvincingly that he wanted to see the Trump donors harassed.
“Well, the first thing is I don’t want anybody harassed or targeted,” he said.
“But they will be because you put their names in public,” Geist interjected.
“That was not my intention,” Castro insisted.
“But it will happen,” Geist shot back.
“These things are public,” Castro replied, repeating a weak left-wing argument. Yes, the information is public record and accessible online, but when a Democrat politician shares an enemies list like this, it is meant as a dog-whistle to the party’s far-left foot soldiers to mobilize against the individuals on the list.
Castro repeated that he just wanted the donors to “think twice about supporting a guy who is fueling hate in this country.”
“If you agree that rhetoric can lead to incitement, even if it triggers just one person to do something terrible, does it give you any pause about putting these people’s names out in public?” Geist pressed.
Castro again rationalized that the names were already public.
“There are eleven retirees and one homemaker who are not public,” Geist shot back.
Having seen all of his arguments fall apart thanks to Geist’s intense grilling, Castro was left to justify his heinous tweet by simply saying the list “was already circulating” and he just shared it. Castro added weakly that the controversy was just “a distraction” from the fact that “people are grieving in El Paso.”
Then, he mimicked the president’s call for unity in the country after the mass shootings over the weekend.
“The world and our country should be focused on that and the country coming together and healing and the country unifying,” he said.
Scarborough couldn’t resist getting in one last dig toward the Trump donors.
“It would be nice to hear actually those who are contributing to Donald Trump say the same thing,” he said, even though the donors never asked to be thrown into Castro’s “national conversation.”