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


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:


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

“I’d Like to Know What the Hell That Thing Is” Sen. McCain Confuses Everyone, Especially Himself, At Comey Hearing

“You’re going to have to help me out here, said Senator John McCain to former FBI Director James Comey today during Capitol Hill hearings. And that is exactly what everyone who listened to his line of questioning was thinking. Take, for example, the faces of the other Senators listening.

Here’s Senator Rubio’s face in case you couldn’t see it:


Okay, but what was it that Senator McCain said that confused everyone? It’s hard to describe it exactly. It’s sort of the whole thing. Here is the full video:

On the surface it would be a rather typical question. Why did you do X for Democrats but do Y for a Republican. I mean, I think that’s what the gist was. Although he seemed to think Hillary was being investigated about … Russia? Whatever the case, it obviously didn’t work and he definitely seemed to be completely confused.

Perhaps Senator Rubio said it best when asked about it afterward.

“I didn’t follow that line of questioning very well, to be honest with you.”

That does seem to be the general reaction, Senator.

Oh and the quote in the headline? Yeah, that was from another line of questions from Senator McCain:

This one I understood. If President Trump told me we had “a thing”, I’d definitely want to know what the hell that thing was. And how to get rid of it.


The post “I’d Like to Know What the Hell That Thing Is” Sen. McCain Confuses Everyone, Especially Himself, At Comey Hearing appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

President Trump’s Radioactive Twitter Proves Why He Needs Republican Critics

This has to stop. On Tuesday, the Department of Defense was flabbergasted and flatfooted when presented with Donald Trump’s tweets about Middle East nations cutting ties with Qatar. As streiff noted, it’s not good.

“I can’t help you with that,” Pentagon spokesman Capt. Jeff Davis said in response to a question about reconciling the president’s social media remarks and Department of Defense comments about the U.S. ally.

“I will only tell you that we have, with regard to our bases there, continued presence in our operations.”

Davis declined to answer a question about whether Qatar supports terrorism saying: “I’m not the right person to ask that. I consider them a host to our very important base at Al Udeid.”

When asked whether Trump’s Twitter messages could impact U.S. forces’ safety in Qatar, Davis said the Pentagon has not taken additional security measures.

More here.

It’s not the first time his tweets have contradicted what the rest of the government and his own spokespeople have said in public statements. As long as he has his fingers on the buttons, it won’t be the last. It’s a radioactive Twitter. As in, nuclear. And that doesn’t even get into the puerile rants he indulges in. They may be catharsis for his hardcore base, but they are in no way good for America.

So before you reflexively defend him on some Prager-esque grounds that we face total destruction as a people if any Republican criticizes Trump, consider the idea that not criticizing him carries at least equal if not greater danger.

The President needs conservative critics. All politicians require having their bad decisions critiqued by those who would keep them on the straight and narrow, but in Trump’s case, it’s much more than that. No one, not anyone, can credibly claim that he is not a massive ego in a position that continues to inflate it. He has always operated on the premise that he knows best. Indeed, he ran on that very concept, and reminds people of his belief in himself on an almost hourly basis. When someone like that is surrounded by an army of yes men ready to defend his every action, no matter how stupid, then guess what he will believe.

He will believe nothing he does is stupid. Or even mistaken.

This is not a complicated concept. It does not require the belabored pitch that the constant exhortations from the pro-Trump right to the anti-Trump and Trump-skeptical right to come on into the trench require. This is pure reason and patently obvious. What’s more, those who would entreat you in hundred-paragraph essays on the urgency of America’s need for you to pitch a tent in Trumpland already know it. They already know this is true. He needs critics. He needs them on the right.

Some are just unwilling to do it. Maybe they don’t like negative feedback, I couldn’t say, but he needs it nevertheless.

And not weak-chinned, mealy-mouthed, waffling objection. He needs pushback. The kind Bush got when he nominated Harriet Miers. The kind that John McCain gets when he transgresses conservative orthodoxy (which is bad for him but good for Trump for some reason.)

They tell you that this is war and the consequences of not supporting him are dangerous. Well I tell you that he is dangerous. His Twitter is dangerous. His personality, his way of thinking. These are dangerous. They sometimes get a good result (Gorsuch) but don’t fool yourself into believing that’s because of making a right decision for the right reasons. Lightning might clear away brush and undergrowth and let a forest flourish, but it will still burn your face off if it hits you. Luckily this lightning can be influenced where to strike.

A chorus of critics can make a difference. If not directly on him, then on his advisers and confidantes, who’ve already pushed him to make decisions he wouldn’t have made, by his own admission. Indeed, one of the chief arguments that pro-Trump people made in 2016 was that Trump can be handled and managed to do the right thing. Well then why not do that? Why pitch handling and managing and then, when he’s in office, roll over and cheer for everything he does. Does that make sense?

Trump’s Twitter is dangerous. It’s reckless. And he can’t make it go away by accusing the press of being “obsessed” with his Twitter. The world is obsessed with it. Diplomats are. World leaders are. The way he sees things matter, even if Kellyanne Conway wants to pretend it’s just a silly media hobby. Even if conservative writers prattle on about blue check marks fighting to have the top reply to his tweet. (By the way, you really must realize how dumb it looks to write articles whining about people who reply to the President on Twitter. It’s the ultimate in water-carrying, point-missing nonsense writing.) What he tweets matters because he is the President of the United States and he’s using it to make his thoughts known.

So he has two options: He can have better thoughts, or he can put down his drug. If you can’t criticize him for this, if you can’t say “enough, shut up and work, think before you speak” then you aren’t helping the Republican cause or fighting “fascism” or whatever other noble cause you’ve given yourself credit for spearheading. Nope. You’re just being a yes-man aiding the Twitter apocalypse.

He should put down the phone. And you should put down your pom-poms and say so. Like you actually mean it.

You say Trump can give Republicans and conservatives the policy objectives they’ve waited for. Then make him. Show a spine and say what he’s doing wrong. At least try it with this one. We are The People, after all.

The post President Trump’s Radioactive Twitter Proves Why He Needs Republican Critics appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

BREAKING: FBI SWAT Team Raid in Dearborn, Michigan on “National Security Issue”

Various news outlets, including the Detroit Free Press, report tonight that the FBI has raided a home in Dearborn, Michigan on a matter of national security. Citing sources within the investigation, the report indicates that suspects in an incident at another location were tracked to the home.

The Free Press has a quote from the FBI:

FBI spokesperson Timothy Wiley declined to comment on specifics of the operation, stating only:

“FBI personnel are on scene conducting a law enforcement operation. There is no threat to public safety.”

We will bring you any significant updates to the story as information becomes available.

The post BREAKING: FBI SWAT Team Raid in Dearborn, Michigan on “National Security Issue” appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

BREAKING: Huge Blast Near U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan (Updated: Photos Show Devastation)

Reports are racing in about a huge explosion that took place in Kabul, Afghanistan Wednesday morning (local time), near the green zone and just a few hundred meters from the U.S. embassy, as well as several other embassies.

Several reporters were on scene in their local bureaus when the explosion rocked the city.

Reuters reports plumes of black smoke filled the air above the green zone and the Presidential Palace. As many as 60 people have already been reported injured in the blast, which took place about 45 minutes ago at the time of this writing.

Here are some of the early photos from the area. (See updates for more)

Earlier this month, a car bomb killed 8 people also near the U.S. Embassy. This story may be updated as information comes in.

UPDATE: Reports of fatalities are coming in, no estimate on the number.

UPDATE: Just wow, this update from journalist Sarah Carter. Just wow.

UPDATE 3: The blast was caused (again) by a suicide bomber.
From the AP:

Najib Danish, deputy spokesman for the Interior Ministry, said at least 50 people were killed or wounded in the suicide car bombing Wednesday.

UPDATE 4: The latest casualty report (2:11 a.m ET).

UPDATE 5: Wow the death toll is climbing. (2:45 a.m.) Just terrible.

The post BREAKING: Huge Blast Near U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan (Updated: Photos Show Devastation) appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State