My Opponent Took to Social Media to Defend Antifa – I'm Not Kidding.
My Democrat opponent for Nevada State Assembly District 41, Vinny Spotleson, took to X this week to defend himself after a fellow Republican Assembly candidate accused him of “misleading the youth.”
Then he posted something that was flatly, provably false.
Here’s exactly what he wrote:
The NV GOP AD2 candidate said I was “misleading” the youth. Meanwhile protestors just got sentenced to 50 yrs in prison in TX, where feds called noisemaking fireworks “terrorism.”
ICE continues to violate the constitution and murder people without consequences.
Sources below https://t.co/iUFSThHXyq— Vinny Spotleson (@vinnyspot) June 24, 2026
Now I'm going to show you what his own sources actually say.
And then you can decide for yourself whether this is the kind of judgment you want representing you in Carson City.
First, Who Is Vinny Spotleson?
Vinny Spotleson isn't some political newcomer.
He's a longtime Democrat operative.
He worked for Harry Reid.
He worked for Dina Titus.
He ran the Sierra Club's Nevada chapter.
The Nevada Independent once described him as the most progressive candidate in this race.
He lost a Democratic primary in 2016 in a different district and has spent years looking for a seat he could win.
Today he's running in AD41.
When he's not running for office, he's indoctrinating high school students in “woke” social studies.
Which brings us to what he posted this week.
What Spotleson Claimed
While defending himself against accusations that he was misleading young people, Spotleson posted that protesters in Texas had been sentenced to 50 years in prison for what he described as “noisemaking fireworks.”
He linked to a BBC article as proof.
Then he claimed that ICE was “violating the Constitution and murdering people without consequences.”
He linked to a Reuters article for that claim.
That's a pretty serious set of accusations.
There's just one problem.
His own sources don't say what he claimed they said.
The Part About the Cop Who Got Shot
Let's start with the BBC article.
According to Spotleson's version of events, people were handed decades-long prison sentences because of fireworks.
That's not what happened.
The BBC article reports that an Alvarado, Texas police officer responding to the scene was shot in the neck.
Shot.
In.
The.
Neck.
Federal prosecutors say a group linked to a North Texas Antifa cell attacked a federal immigration detention facility.
The group allegedly vandalized vehicles.
They allegedly vandalized a guard kiosk.
And when law enforcement arrived, shots were fired.
Prosecutors say the alleged ringleader, a former Marine reservist, fired at the responding officer and directed others to retrieve rifles.
Investigators later seized more than 50 weapons connected to the broader investigation.
The resulting sentences ranged from 30 to 100 years.
The alleged ringleader received the maximum sentence.
A jury convicted them.
A judge described the attack as an assault on democracy.
That's the story.
Not fireworks.
Not noise.
Not a harmless protest.
A police officer was shot in the neck.
Yet somehow Spotleson reduced all of that to “noisemaking fireworks.”
Either he never read the article he linked or he deliberately left out the most important facts.
Neither explanation inspires confidence.
The Reuters Article Doesn't Say “Murder”
Now let's look at his ICE claim.
Spotleson wrote that ICE is “murdering people.”
That's a powerful accusation.
So naturally I went looking for the evidence.
I read the Reuters article he linked.
The word “murder” does not appear anywhere in the story.
Not once.
What Reuters actually reports is that deaths in ICE detention facilities have increased since January 2025 and that advocates and researchers have raised concerns about medical care, staffing levels, and rapidly growing detention populations.
The article discusses deaths involving heart attacks, suicides, and complications from pre-existing medical conditions.
Those are legitimate issues that deserve discussion.
Reasonable people can debate detention standards, medical care, and immigration policy.
But that's not the same thing as murder.
Reuters never makes that claim.
Spotleson did.
Likewise, Reuters does not conclude that ICE is violating the Constitution “without consequences.”
There is no legal finding of that kind in the article.
That was Spotleson's language, not Reuters'.
He attached a source link underneath a claim that the source itself doesn't support.
This Isn't the First Time
The troubling part isn't just one social media post.
It's a pattern of bad judgment.
Spotleson has publicly opposed the Southern Nevada Supplemental Airport, a project expected to create thousands of jobs and generate billions in economic activity.
He has argued there should be no urban development beyond the M Resort.
AD41 sits right next to Henderson Executive Airport.
The people who live in this district would be among the biggest beneficiaries of expanded aviation infrastructure.
Spotleson looked at that opportunity and said “hell, no.”
He's spent years fighting NV Energy on energy policy while Nevada families struggle with rising utility bills.
And now he's minimizing a violent attack that left a police officer shot and inventing claims about federal law enforcement that aren't supported by his own sources.
This Is About Character
I'm a 46-year southern Nevada native.
I raised my family here.
I spent 26 years working my way up from casino dealer to pit boss.
I understand accountability.
Words matter.
Facts matter.
When you make a claim, you should be able to back it up.
I've signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge promising voters that I will oppose and vote against any and all tax increases.
Vinny Spotleson has refused to sign it.
That helps explain why he supported the largest tax increase in Nevada history in 2015.
And it helps explain the difference between us.
I support the men and women of law enforcement.
Including the officer in Alvarado, Texas who was shot in the neck responding to a call.
He deserves better than having a Nevada legislative candidate describe his attackers as people making noise with fireworks.
Spotleson was trying to defend himself against accusations that he was misleading young people.
But after reading the articles he linked, it's fair to ask whether those accusations weren't onto something.
The facts were right there in his own sources.
He either didn't read them. Or he hoped nobody else would.
The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Nevada News & Views. Digital technology was used in the research, writing, and production of this article. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
