The Deplorable Left

The news, the blogs, social media, and water coolers around the country focus a lot on the Trump universe. Understandably. Not only is there a lot to follow, it’s almost always sensational, weird, unbelievable, hilarious, sad, or of course, deplorable. In the case of the national press this is generally to the exclusion of stories about the bad left, despite the many opportunities.

Not so here at RedState, despite the whines to the contrary, where we cover the bad guys on the left all the time, as our archives clearly demonstrate. Nevertheless, two stories that made a lot of news in the last week or so made me want to single the left out for a two minute headshake and remind everyone that there are news stories out there that don’t have a last name that rhymes with rump. Both stories involve a supposed “rights” march organized by the professional agitators of the left.

First up, a “pride” march. Last month, the annual Chicago Dyke March kicked out Jews because they were deemed offensive.

Some would disagree with my characterization, but I assure you it is accurate.

Here is an excerpt from the story as originally reported:

Jewish people celebrating LGBT Pride in Chicago were told not to display Star of David flags because other people found them ‘offensive.’

The Jewish Star of David flag was banned from the city’s annual Dyke March celebrations, and several people carrying the flag were removed form the march because their presence “made people feel unsafe,” LGBT paper Windy City Times reported.

Since that time, the organizers of the march doubled down on their Jew hate after getting a digital earful on social media.

zio-tears
Screenshot courtesy Yair Rosenberg

And in case, you aren’t clear what they mean by “Zio” …
zio-term-origin

Zio tears. And they were confronted about this, too. First they didn’t care at all:

Then offered what they apparently considered an explanation:

But of course, the truth of their anti-Semitism was obvious. How obvious? Guess what their Instagram looks like? Again, courtesy Yair Rosenberg:

dyke-march2
dyke-march3

I especially like how the second one literally has a watermark from a Twitter account with “Nazi” in the name.

So that’s the first Deplorable march. A supposed anti-hate pride march. The second was a march for women, appropriately named The Women’s March.

This group is already bad news. The organizer, Linda Sarsour, is well-known to RedState readers. She’s the supporter of radical Islam, terrorism, sharia law, and many other heinous things, who has talked up the value of preventing women from driving and suggested that some women who were opposed to radical Islam should “have their vaginas taken away,” and thinks Muslim Americans should declare a jihad on Donald Trump. And I can’t recall, how does radical Islam feel about Jews?

Amazingly, though, this Women’s March story isn’t about that. It’s about Assata Shakur, who murdered New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foester in 1977 and then fled to Cuba. Shakur has the dubious distinction of being the first woman to top the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists list. And on Sunday, she was the subject of a tweet from the Women’s March.

If you’re wondering about that hashtag, it’s the one they’re using to post a new image each day regarding a sign that represents the “resistance.” Which is, apparently, open to murdering cops.

If you’re not sure how that advances whatever women’s rights issue they may purport to advocate for, join the club.

Now, here is why these are more than just one-off situations. In the case of the so-called Dyke March, the initial banning of signs or flags featuring the Star of David is not all that unusual, in the context of the left. It is routine at left wing rallies to see hate Israel signage and shirts and hear those messages. It is, on the American left, practically a requirement that you be pro-Palestine, commonplace that you be anti-Israel, and accepted that being anti-Israel can be a virulent and aggressive view. Though they’d never admit it, their use of the Palestine issue as a fig leaf for just plain old fashioned Jew hate is widespread on the far left, and in this case, the mask simply slipped.

For all that they complain about the alt-right and white nationalism, it’s not because of those groups’ view on Jews. Anyone who has been to a leftist protest, such as the Recreate 68 crowd, knows how easily any cause slips into Jew hating on the far left, be it political opposition, anti-capitalism, or even anti-Trumpism.

In the case of the women’s march, it’s not even far left. This is a mainstream left-of-center group, not merely supported by but zealously defended by Democrat politicians, media personalities, and activists. They are popular, well-funded, have celebrities on board, and are a fully functioning part of the central nervous system of the Democrats and the mainstream left. The group that wants jihad and cop-killing. Mainstream.

In two stories, you get deplorable from both the far left and the mainstream left. Deplorable.

Yes, these are examples only. And unlike stories you might see on MSNBC, here at RedState we can gladly acknowledge that this is not “Every” Democrat, or even every leftist. There are a lot of great and wonderful people who are Democrats. But this behavior is there. It does exist. And they shouldn’t be allowed to sweep it under the rug and tell you to look elsewhere any more than we should.

Democrats and the liberal media never stop asking Republicans to apologize for, explain, and correct every bad apple. Isn’t it about time they even bother to acknowledge the orchard in their back yard?

The post The Deplorable Left appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Oh Good, the President Just Tweeted About Why Working With Russia Against Americans is A-OK

President Trump just tweeted about the many trials and tribulations his son is enduring following his perfectly normal and innocent meeting with Russians about how take out Hillary Clinton.

Jay Caruso will have an editorial posted here shortly going in depth on this tweet, but before that, I have question. Would you have gone to that meeting? I wouldn’t have.

One, I would refuse to take aid from Russkies. Sorry if that makes me sound old, but they are the bad guys and have been half over half a century. I wouldn’t have gone on principle, and I wouldn’t have trusted them anyway.

Speaking of trust, what kind of amateur move was this on the part of Don Jr.? Has he never worked in a high stakes job before? The Trumps, and their friends and fervent fans see a conspiracy behind every Democrat mailbox and pizza place. But he found no reason to distrust a meeting with Russia intended to collude in defeating his opponent?

And finally, I will use the opportunity of this post to give you a sample of something I’m working on for RedState. It’s a new type of newsletter for us, and last week I created a sample dialog. It’s a bit out of date, but pertinent here, so I’m pasting just a portion of it below.

—-

This should have come up…

Hey, remember that time everyone spent months saying that Russia wanted to help Trump win the election, and then Trump and company denied that for months, and it was this huge thing that everyone has been talking about all day every day forever? Yeah, while that was going on, Donald Trump Jr. sat around not mentioning that he willingly attended a meeting for the express purpose of getting help from Russia to beat Hillary Clinton. You see what the problem is there, right? That’s the reason he met with them. While everyone was denying Russia wanted to help Trump win, Don Jr. 100% believed he had a meeting because Russia wanted Trump to win.

Feels like that should have come up. And no, it doesn’t matter if they actually were representing the government of Russia (which would be nearly impossible to prove. Part of spycraft is denying you did it. It’s not like they took pictures with Putin while wearing nametags that said “we duped Junior”) and it doesn’t even matter if any information about Hillary was exchanged.

You have to tell me if you’re a cop, you know…

What matters is that Donald Trump Jr. believed that was the purpose of the meeting, was told that it was the purpose, and went for that purpose. And then sat silent through months of people saying meetings like that took place. Mocking people, in fact, for saying such meetings took place. That’s pretty amazing. (But yes, apologists, not treason.) The press and the administration are getting bogged down in the byzantine ins and outs of government and legality, but it’s not that complicated. It’s just one more example of dishonesty, bad decisions, and bad intentions all around.

And that’s the mail…

That’s the Overnight Mail for today. What have we learned? Pay bloggers more, never get involved in a land crusade in Asia, and above all, something doesn’t have to be treasonous to be slimy and dishonest. If you haven’t learned that in the last couple of decades of government, you’re doing it wrong.

That’s just a sample. The full email was titled “It’s All About Byzantium, Baby” and went into some minor history from the First Crusade. Yeah.

Tomorrow morning, the lead story at 4 am is tentatively titled “The Deplorable Democrats.” Just wanted to point that out in case you forgot that they are awful too.

The post Oh Good, the President Just Tweeted About Why Working With Russia Against Americans is A-OK appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Here Comes the Bus, Don Jr.

The story in the New York Times this week regarding Donald Trump Jr. having a meeting to get oppo on Hillary from the Russians has the media and the left salivating, and the Trumpublican right in denial mode or simply outright nutbagging it.

You may or may not think there is anything to the story, but before you make it your final answer, I’ll just throw this out there for you to think about.

If Donald, Jr. were anyone but Donald, Jr. we’d surely be talking about this as step one in the journey to under the bus town. But of course, he’s not anyone else.

Still …

The post Here Comes the Bus, Don Jr. appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Please Pay No Attention to the Fires Raging All Around You, Thanks!

It is a curious feature of the left that they are the most fervent and the most certain when asking you to disbelieve that which you can plainly see with your eyes, and to believe that which you manifestly cannot. So it is that you are not to believe there is a violent form of Islam in the world, and likewise you must take their word for it that climate armageddon is lurking just the day after tomorrow. And it is why they ask if you would be so kind as to disregard the destruction in Hamburg, Germany that attends the G20 summit this year.

Police officers are silhouetted by fires lit by demonstrators during a protest against the G-20 summit in Hamburg, northern Germany, Thursday, July 6, 2017. The leaders of the group of 20 meet July 7 and 8. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)Police officers are silhouetted by fires lit by demonstrators during a protest against the G-20 summit in Hamburg, northern Germany, Thursday, July 6, 2017. The leaders of the group of 20 meet July 7 and 8. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)

There is a violent side to leftism that they deny, as there is a violent side of the right that is also denied. In the case of the left, and especially with regard to the GXX summits, it’s practically a holiday tradition. Rioting, angry protests, roads blocked, cars set on fire, graffiti sprayed, glass broken, fa la la la la, lah la la la.

But you mustn’t say so, because the left isn’t violent or extreme. Just like you mustn’t point out that Linda Sarsour was knowing and deliberate in her word choice last week, hoping not only for the reaction that she got (anger on the right, knee-jerk defense of her from the left) but also in service of her stated goal of integrating Islamic ideals like sharia and jihad into acceptable Western norms.

You can’t talk about that. If you do, you’re a bigot. (Or maybe you hate women, or perhaps, somehow, you just don’t want to hear from African Americans and therefore reject this foreign non-black woman’s backward religious beliefs? It gets confusing.) Sarsour can’t be bad or wrong because she’s a minority victim. And Hamburg can’t be on fire, because leftists aren’t violent.

Who are you going to believe? Your liberal betters, or your lying eyes?

Here are some pictures and videos of the destruction in Hamburg. Like violence, rapes, and destruction from some among the many refugees, these fires that you can see by looking at them do not exist. They cannot. The left is kindly and hug trees. Only the right has anger.

A post shared by Pascal Wild (@pallidotcom) on Jul 7, 2017 at 2:29am PDT

afp-tweet

At least 76 police officers were injured when violent protesters clashed with police on Thursday in the streets of Hamburg, Germany, where this week’s G-20 summit is set to take place, police said.

There’s nothing to see here. This is not indicative of anything. It doesn’t speak to the left at large. Neither does the shooting at a Republican baseball practice. These are things that you must not notice, about which you must draw no conclusions. Just like ISIS isn’t Islamic and terrorism is always lone wolf isolated incidents.

They will tell you this all day today about any of these subjects. Because they are about as prepared to be honest about these topics as you know who fans are about you know who’s flaws.

Move along. Close the curtain. Look away.

Hamburg is on fire. But everything’s fine.

The post Please Pay No Attention to the Fires Raging All Around You, Thanks! appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Independence: This Fourth of July, Think About What it Means

Today is the 241st anniversary of the Independence of the United States. America’s birthday. Our Freedom day.

Last year, I wrote on this day about how we, as a nation and as individuals, embrace risk. The first patriots of the United States put it all on the line for their independence from a far-off power; the current group put the future of that heritage at risk in an election, as we must always do when we go into the voting booth.

So now it’s a year a later, and 241 years later, and I’m asking you to remember what Independence actually means. I could go down a list of reasons why I think it’s important to focus some thought on this idea this year in particular, but I want you to think of the reasons why. The concept of freedom is background noise for most of us, but maybe this year, rather than merely celebrating (but do celebrate) bring it into the foreground. Talk about it.

When people say freedom isn’t free, or that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance, that’s not just about the men and women who risk their lives to defend our nation and national interests every day. It’s an ideological vigilance that is required as well.

Freedom can be lost in war. It can also be surrendered in peace. For comfort. For safety, it can be lost. It can even be surrendered in the name of petty political vengeance.

Independence is a word with a definition, an idea with implications, and a label we place on the birth of this nation. During the life of that Independence, there have been wars, there has been expansion, there has been loss and gain, and we’ve faced losing it all. We must always face losing it all. Even to ourselves.

But it’s not up to me to tell you if your freedom, if our independence and our way of life is safe today. I don’t want to write all the reasons I think it’s important to consider the nature of independence this year. It’s up to you to think about it. That’s the price of freedom, after all. Vigilance.

It’s the Fourth of July. Have fun. Barbecue, set off fireworks (but don’t barbecue yourself setting off fireworks) and celebrating the amazing freedom we have as Americans. But also consider the risks. Not just the ones we take, but the ones we face.

The post Independence: This Fourth of July, Think About What it Means appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


NASA Child Labor and Marrow Camps Are From Mars … Or ARE They???

mars-fiction

In other news, NASA has finally spoken up on the critical controversy surrounding their alleged child slavery ring operating on Mars, an explosive story first reported by White House press room credentialed Infowars.

“There are no humans on Mars. There are active rovers on Mars,” said suspiciously named NASA spokesperson Guy Webster, also known as “just some Guy.” Denial is exactly what a child slavery Mars base operator would do, I might add.

“There are active rovers on Mars,” he added divertingly. “There was a rumor going around last week that there weren’t. There are. But there are no humans,” he said in an exclusive interview with Ben Collins of The Daily Beast.

Infowars operates a news and intelligence operation on the second planet from the sun, which is where we get the phrase “Child slaves are from Mars, Infowars is from Venus.”

The definitely real Mars colony allegations were made on the Alex Jones show, who has an “amazing” reputation according to President Trump.

The Daily Beast’s Collins points out that also revealed in the White House credentialed Infowars broadcast was the allegation that the children are not only enslaved, but also murdered for their blood and bone marrow. Which I mean, of course.

We’ll beam any updates on this dramatic story into your brain using chemtrails from gay frogs. Also probably Hannity’s show. Stay tuned.

The post NASA Child Labor and Marrow Camps Are From Mars … Or ARE They??? appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Put Not Your Faith in Those Who Put Theirs in Democrats … Right?

Special Counsel Robert Mueller has put together a team, some of whom we know about, to take on the job of investigating the various and sundry pending Russia issues, et al, about which we’ve all heard so much. Mueller himself has impeccable credentials, as Jay Caruso details here.

In discussing those he has picked for his team, however, the question has come up about political contributions. How do you feel, for example, about these credentials?

  • Handed over $41,000 to Eliot Spitzer, who made it all the way to the Governor’s Mansion before his relationship with a high-priced prostitute became public. And gave almost $4500 to disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner who publicly tweeted lewd pictures of himself.
  • Has no problem handing out cash to some of the most liberal politicians hailing from New York. Gave $64,000 to Andrew Cuomo, helped elect and re-elect New York mayor David Dinkins, and donated $8,900 to Chuck Schumer, one of the leading Senate Democrats advocating for amnesty and to put liberal justices on the Supreme Court.
  • Is a significant backer of the corrupt Democrat machine in New York, giving $138,000 to the party over several decades. Since 1999, has personally contributed over $350,000 to New York candidates and committees, and at least an additional $50,000 through one businesses.
  • Has contributed to Hillary’s New York senate and presidential campaigns, and given at least $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation (though some reports have it closer to $250,000).
  • Given thousands of dollars to individuals with legal and ethical violations. Gave $56,000 to convicted felon Alan Hevesi who went to prison for a massive pay to play pension scandal. Contributed to a disgraced Queens assemblyman who stole $90,000 from a little league association. And he donated to Sheldon Silver, a former Speaker of the New York State Assembly who is facing 130 years in prison for a corruption.

Pretty unsavory, don’t you think? Well that’s not the CV of any of Mueller’s picks for the investigative team. It is in fact a list of some of the many contributions to Democrats made by Donald Trump over the years. (Source.)

Just a reminder.

Nevertheless, it is true that of the lawyers we know selected for the team, two were max donors to Hillary’s campaign last year, and those two and a third have a history of Dem donations. The 2016 cash is a pretty recent contribution. And while we can’t expect Mueller to somehow magically find people who have no opinion on politics, one would expect that his team consist of those with either no highly partisan activity (like maxed out donations) or, at the very least, a balance among the partisans (although as Jay noted checking their past donations probably wasn’t a priority in their selection). Maybe you don’t get that balance by adding Trump donors specifically, but Republican donors at least would be prudent now that the information is out there.

I must hasten to add, though, and emphatically, that in my opinion, and the learned opinion of Senator Marco Rubio, the focus of the investigation should be on our national security and ascertaining what Russia did to breach it, not on the increasingly unlikely Democrat dream of finding a smoking gun linking Donald Trump to a conspiracy with Vladimir Putin. Such a focus would be non-partisan by definition, and prior donations a trivial thing. If we are serious people. If we actually care about getting to the bottom of this. If we actually want to get this done right.

Big ifs. In the meantime, as Katie Pavlich noted in the above-linked column, the team should probably be balanced out. If for no other reason than that the President shouldn’t be the subject of an investigation conducted by so many people who share his exact taste in political contributions. You know?

The post Put Not Your Faith in Those Who Put Theirs in Democrats … Right? appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


The Crumbling Collusion Delusion

It’s all falling apart. Not the Trump administration, not Western Society (yet), but the theory that the Trump campaign colluded and coordinated with Russia in order to influence or steal the presidential election from Hillary Clinton.

Who could have seen it coming?

As I said in the link above, it’s important to start out by making the distinction between discussing whether Russia tried to tamper with the election at all and discussing whether the Trump campaign colluded with them to do it. They are separate issues. Innocence on the part of the Trump campaign, if established, would in no way clear Russia or Putin. That’s important to remember as we go through this.

But why, you may ask, do we say now that the collusion theory is falling down? Well there’s simply nothing to support it. The gravity of six months without evidence takes its toll.

Last week the anticipation for former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony was fever-pitched. The left was hot and randy, Democrats and the press were salivating and putting up countdown clocks. The volcano of resistance hungrily simmered. Yet what, with regard to collusion came of it? Nothing, except to generally indicate Trump wasn’t even personally being investigated.

For six months, Congress has investigated. The FBI longer. And yet there is still no evidence, no smoking gun. Yesterday Attorney General Jeff Sessions testified under oath before Congress. Perhaps this would be the moment. Alas, as Sen. Tom Cotton noted when he began his questions, Democrats on the committee hadn’t even directly asked Sessions, who was under oath, the pertinent question.

“Did Donald Trump or any of his associates in the campaign collude with Russia in hacking those emails and releasing them to the public?” he said. “That’s where we started six months ago. We have now heard from six of the eight Democrats on this committee, and to my knowledge, I don’t think a single one of them asked that question.”

That’s a pretty devastating point, folks. But it’s not all.

At National Review, David French gets at the same point:

1. Not only is there no evidence that Trump personally colluded with Russians or ordered anyone to collude with Russians, there’s now evidence that he hasn’t been under personal investigation by the FBI.

That’s number one of four critical points.

Sen. Rubio, too, summed things up neatly in an interview after the hearing. “I challenge you to find a single Senator who says they have evidence of collusion,” he said to reporters. There were no takers.

Lack of evidence is evidence, but it is not proof, so we are theoretically waiting and seeing. So why the word “delusion”? Because, like the notion conceived anew each and every morning in a million resistance activists’ dreams that today, TODAY will be the day Trump is finally and at long last impeached, the utter religious faith that Donald Trump, Jeff Sessions, and the rest of his team literally and nefariously and espionagiously arranged for the Presidential election to be “hacked” and stolen in exchange for future favors for Putin is plainly fantasy. Which is to say, they are fantasizing that this is a known fact and we’re merely trying to establish the chain of evidence, as opposed to the reality that there are investigations into a theory and that theory isn’t panning out.

To put it yet another way, there’s no there there, despite your hopes and dreams. And what a terrible thing to hope and dream, I might add.

As Robert Mueller conducts his investigation into all things Russia, we’ll have even more statements, press conferences, questions and answers to go over. And then, when that is done, let it be done.

What should concern Americans, including those Trump loyalists (not to mention the President himself) who are deeply enamored of Russia over this on (I guess) the grounds that the enemy of my democrat is my friend, is that Russia clearly and extraordinarily tampered with or attempted to tamper with the 2016 election.

As I wrote earlier this year, this is a big deal. And there are many reasons why the stakes are higher in this case than the other (constant) cyberespionage efforts against the United States.

Democrats have repeatedly make the argument that “good” conservatives would care more about our sovereignty and security than partisan political matters, and should therefore be as fervent as they in pursuing the investigation into Trump’s connection to or collusion with Russia. Fine, but now it’s time to turn that around.

“Good” liberals would care about our sovereignty and security than partisan political gain, and should therefore focus their attention on what Russia actually did, rather than what Trump, by all appearances, did not. Focus on the right thing. It’s what a good liberal would do.

The post The Crumbling Collusion Delusion appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Marco Rubio’s Excellent Post-Sessions Hearing Interview (Full Video)

Senator Rubio had an enlightening exchange with Attorney General Sessions Tuesday, and an even more enlightening exchange with reporters after the hearing ended.

I could summarize, but you really will get more out of it by watching. (If the embed doesn’t load, click here.)

“I challenge you to find a single Senator who says they have evidence of collusion,” he said. Challenge not accepted.

He pushes back against the idea that the Attorney General didn’t answer questions (although to be fair, the Attorney General didn’t answer some questions), but more importantly he brings clarity to issues that some are deliberately trying to keep murky. Namely, whether there has been any evidence to date of collusion. (Hint: there hasn’t been.)

As I wrote for today’s lead story, the most important thing to find out now is the answer to the question of what Russia did and how they did it. And Senator Rubio hammers that point home.

The post Marco Rubio’s Excellent Post-Sessions Hearing Interview (Full Video) appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State


Major Sponsor Drops “Shakespeare in the Park” After Depiction of the Assassination of “Trump” (UPDATE: Second sponsor out)

In this year’s “Shakespeare in the Park”, an annual tradition in Central Park in New York City, there was a slight change in character when it came to the death by assassination of Julius Caesar; the Emperor was replaced by a man in a business suit and a very familiar appearance.

ADDS THE NAMES OF THE CHARACTERS PORTRAYED ON STAGE - In this May 21, 2017 photo provided by The Public Theater, Tina Benko, left, portrays Melania Trump in the role of Caesar's wife, Calpurnia, and Gregg Henry, center left, portrays President Donald Trump in the role of Julius Caesar during a dress rehearsal of The Public Theater's Free Shakespeare in the Park production of Julius Caesar, in New York. Rounding out the cast on stage is Teagle F. Bougere as Casca, and Elizabeth Marvel, right, as Marc Anthony. (Joan Marcus/The Public Theater via AP)
In this May 21, 2017 photo provided by The Public Theater, Tina Benko, left, portrays Melania Trump in the role of Caesar’s wife, Calpurnia, and Gregg Henry, center left, portrays President Donald Trump in the role of Julius Caesar during a dress rehearsal of The Public Theater’s Free Shakespeare in the Park production of Julius Caesar. (Joan Marcus/The Public Theater via AP)

In the play, of course, Caesar is assassinated by the conspirators, including Marc Antony (played by Elizabeth Marvel, above right). The brutal stabbing remains a part of the “re-imagined” play, but with the twist that the President is instead murdered by only women and minorities. Because get it??

“Fox & Friends” aired a segment this weekend featuring Townhall’s Guy Benson this weekend to discuss. “This is so incredibly in poor taste that I’m surprised they haven’t cast Kathy Griffin in the production,” said Benson.

There will be whataboutism to go around, with the left jeering about how Trump voters are supposed to be opposed to “safe spaces” and the right pointing out how much hell would have broken loose if the first black President were assassinated in a play. There will be a fair amount of “but Shakespeare was’t glorifying assassination” know-it-all-ism too.

But as all that goes on and social media rages, two major sponsors of “Shakespeare in the Park” have pulled their funding. First came Delta Airlines:

delta-tweets-shakespeare

Then later, Bank of America pulled their funding as well. Via the New York Times:

Bank of America followed hours later, saying it would withdraw financial support from the production of “Julius Caesar” but would not end its financial relationship with the theater, which a spokeswoman, Susan Atran, said had lasted for 11 years.

“The Public Theater chose to present ‘Julius Caesar’ in a way that was intended to provoke and offend,” Ms. Atran said. “Had this intention been made known to us, we would have decided not to sponsor it. We are withdrawing our funding for this production.”

(Note that the New York Times refers to the lead as “Trump-like.” Let’s not be children here. It’s a distinction without a difference.)

The post Major Sponsor Drops “Shakespeare in the Park” After Depiction of the Assassination of “Trump” (UPDATE: Second sponsor out) appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State