Tomi Lahren Is OUT At The Blaze

Glenn Beck apparently felt necessary to take a stand.

Popularity or principle.

Last week, there was heated controversy, after Beck suspended on-air personality, Tomi Lahren, after she appeared on “The View” and not only announced that she was pro-choice, but that conservatives who supported the pro-life cause were “hypocrites.”

The problem with Lahren had been brewing for some time, however, with some saying she was difficult to work with, making irrational demands of staff, and showing a general disregard for those around her.

The bigger problem is that she was thrust into the spotlight based on her millennial appeal, rather than any actual life experience or mooring in principle.

She referred to herself as libertarian, a conservative, and a “constitutional,” so basically, anything that sounded cool as a combo, even if it made no sense.

Youth and cutesy shtick will only take you so far. At some point, you have to prove yourself grounded, reasoned, and with a basic, working knowledge of where you stand.

Lahren is all over the map, declaring that the government “get out of her body” when it comes to the life of unborn children, and it took her to a place her employer, Glenn Beck, was not willing to follow.

An article with Page Six is reporting today that the suspension, which was at first said to be for a week, is now for good.

“Glenn is reminding the world of his conservative principles by sidelining Tomi after she insulted conservatives by calling them hypocrites,” one Beck insider told me.

“He’s trying to balance being a leading conservative thinker and also someone who can unify the country,” the Beck associate told me. “He just couldn’t sit by and watch as Tomi Lahren said there’s no way for conservatives to justify anything other than being pro-choice.”

Lahren’s contract was said to be up in September, so Beck is just helping her get a head start.

For Beck, it’s a gamble.

Lahren jumped the Trump train early and was welcomed into the sphere of Trumpidian cultism.

They tend to lash out at any who are seen as attacking one of their own, and by proxy, attacking their cult leader.

Lahren’s appeal is limited, however, and if Beck and The Blaze continue to hold to the higher standards of conservatism, it is a storm that can be weathered.

In other words, Good for him.

We should never waver in our support for the unborn.

The post Tomi Lahren Is OUT At The Blaze appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

Bill Maher Becomes Christianity’s Unlikely Defender

And this is a freedom that entertainers have that, unfortunately, our politicians have to tip-toe around.

You’re not going to catch me cheering on Bill Maher, as a general rule.

The man is no friend to Christians, having made our beliefs a target of scorn and ridicule for years.

That being said, he’s not exclusive with his disdain for religion, and he has not held his tongue in the usual, liberal way, as far as protecting Islam from criticism.

Again, he’s no champion for Christ, but in a recent episode of “Real Time,” Maher came out hard against apologists for Islam, in forcing them to look at the differences between Christians in the world and followers of Islam.

On Friday’s broadcast, the recent terror attack in London, where four people were killed was the hot topic.

One guest, Louise Mensch, a former Conservative member of the U.K. Parliament, and current Heat Street columnist jumped to the defense of the Islamic community in London.

 “The guy was British-born. His name was Adrian before his converted. And partisans of Russia were out in the streets saying it was an illegal immigrant who did it, trying to turn the London people against our Muslim friends and neighbors. And you’re not going to do that.”

Maher responded:

“Let’s not pretend this has nothing to do with Islam, the religion,” he said.

“It doesn’t,” Mensch responded. “It has nothing to do with Islam the same way Timothy McVeigh had nothing to do with Roman Catholicism.”


Tim McVeigh seems to be all they have. He’s the go-to reference point whenever someone needs to talk about the violence of Christianity – that, and the Crusades.

“Every time some bomb goes off, before it goes off, somebody yells ‘Allahu Akbar!’” said Maher. “I never hear anybody go ‘Merry Christmas! This one’s for the flying nun!’”

Heh. Good one.

Of course, those who feel the need to cover for Islam won’t let facts slow them down.

“When Christians do anything like this, do we ever say, ‘Christian terrorism’?” asked Yale professor and author Timothy Snyder.

“No. But is Christian terrorism as big a problem?” asked Maher in response.

“If you lived in Oklahoma City in the 90s,” injected MSNBC host Chris Hayes. “We’re talking about London here.”

Seriously? I think we have enough problems in the now that gazing backwards is probably counterproductive, at this point.

You’ve got to have more than that.

“That’s a false equivalency,” Maher shot back. “Are there Christian terrorist armies like ISIS?”

“The IRA that blew up London for 15 years!” Hayes exclaimed.

“Yes. But that’s the past! We’re living in the now. There was also the Inquisition,” retorted Maher.

Nice way to get in front of that, because you knew it was coming, eventually.

“Are there Christian terrorist armies now. .. like ISIS, Al Qaeda, al-Shaabab, Boko Haram? Are there armies like that in the world that aren’t Muslim?” he asked. “Let’s not f–k around anymore! Can we get real?”

“I literally don’t agree with you,” Mensch said. “Russia is sending Chechen militants into ISIS trying to leverage this against a billion people.”

He made sense.

He made a lot of sense, but the contortionist views of the left won’t be easily bent.

It makes me wonder if they actually hear themselves.

When they’re alone at night with their thoughts, do they ever go back and question their rationale, in the face of reality? Are these real beliefs they have, or are they so bound to their ideology that the narrative is all that matters?

I’m cautious about handing out kudos to somebody who has been so vile and insulting to the very core of who I am, but I’ll just hang one on the end of a very long pole and extend it to Maher, here. He was right on the money.

The post Bill Maher Becomes Christianity’s Unlikely Defender appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

Is Trump Considering A TV Personality And 9/11 Truther For The Next Supreme Court Seat?

Have you ever heard something so ludicrous that it sent you into wheezing, nose-running fits of laughter – until you find out it’s true?

For me, that moment came when someone suggested that President Trump could potentially be considering a TV personality for the next vacant SCOTUS seat.

Sure, Senator Lindsey Graham, in praising the nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court by Trump, mentioned something about his fear of who Trump would pick for the seat left vacant by the passing of Justice Antonin Scalia. He said he didn’t know who Trump would pick – possibly a TV judge, or something.

You just couldn’t believe he’d go that far, however.

Then again, if Fox News personality, Judge Andrew Napolitano is to be believed, the president is absolutely considering it.

After meeting with President Trump twice during the transition, first in December and again in mid-January, the Newark, N.J.-born television personality told several people that Trump said he was on the list of judges from whom he was selecting a nominee for the high court.

“He said, ‘Trump said I’m on the list,’” said a source who spoke with Napolitano shortly after one of his meetings with the then president-elect. “He’s been saying that since the transition.”

Napolitano was suspended from Fox News for an indefinite length of time this past week for picking up incomplete and unsubstantiated information from an online discussion board, regarding British intelligence surveilling Trump at the behest of then-President Obama, and then presenting that rumor on air as fact.

The British government have vehemently denied the accusations and subsequent testimony by FBI Director James Comey before the House Intelligence Committee confirmed that there was no surveillance or “wiretapping” ordered regarding Donald Trump.

Still, undeterred, Napolitano sees a payoff that far exceeds a few guest spots on TV.

Friends warned Napolitano not to take the president too literally – or seriously. “He’ll take your call and invite you to the Oval Office, but he just wants you to say nice things about him on TV,” the source says he told Napolitano at the time. But that didn’t sink the ambitious judge’s hopes.

Trump released a list of potential replacements for the late Justice Antonin Scalia before the election, vowing to select Scalia’s replacement from that list — and followed through, tapping Tenth Circuit judge Neil Gorsuch for the nomination in January. Napolitano’s name did not appear on any public list.

I suppose Napolitano’s name is on a “special” list. In fact, the term Napolitano is using with those he’s told his exciting bit of news to is that he’s a “sleeper candidate.” He’s submitted his personal and academic works to the president’s office, so he’s actively vying for some sort of consideration.

He also visited with Trump during the transition to talk about the kind of judge needed to fill the SCOTUS seat left vacant by Scalia.

Trump ultimately chose Gorsuch, but should another seat come open, Napolitano feels like he is as good as in.

I guess with those kinds of ambitions, he’s not very worried that an internet hoax got him bounced, indefinitely, from his TV gig.

He has other options, in the meantime, and he is definitely a keen mind.

“I think 20 years from now, people will look at 9/11 the way we look at the assassination of JFK today,” he told radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones in 2010. “It couldn’t possibly have been done the way the government told us.”

Or the way millions of Americans saw with their own eyes being carried out on national TV.

I guess with a reality TV presidency, the next logical step is an InfoWars Supreme Court nominee.

The post Is Trump Considering A TV Personality And 9/11 Truther For The Next Supreme Court Seat? appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

VILE: MSNBC Personality Refers To Unborn Life As “Those Things That Might Turn Into Humans”

It’s been a tough contest, and it’s still early, but an early contender for the Most Vile Idiot of the Year has to be MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry.

If you’re not quite sure who she is, she’s the insufferable void who thought wearing tampons as earrings made some kind of cool, edgy statement.

It didn’t.

While attempting to make a point about the merits of abortion on a recent MSNBC broadcast, Harris-Perry plumbed the depths of depraved and reckless scumbaggery, in an effort to prove how abortion is an economic necessity.

After breaking a model of a fertilized egg, she bumbled her way through an offensive, science-free screed about the origins of human life and the ultimate cost.

Transcript:  Oh, no. That might be bad. I seemed to have popped open the fertilized egg. We’ll put that back together. But the very idea that this would constitute a person, right? And that some set of constitutional rights should come to this.  Look, I get that that is a particular kind of faith claim. It’s not associated with science. But the reality is that if this turns into a person, right, there are economic consequences, right? The cost to raise a child, $10,000 a year up to $20,000 a year. When you’re talking about what it actually costs to have this thing turn into a human, why not allow women to make the best choices that we can with as many resources and options instead of trying to come in and regulate this process?

No, you hateful half-wit. The model you busted is not a living thing, but the actual fertilized egg is the building block of every human life that walks, or has walked, or will walk on this earth.

It’s necessary.

Recent science has even revealed an electric “spark” that occurs when the sperm and egg meet.

It’s a beautiful thing, and if you can quibble over costs and worth before life begins, how far away are we from making random assessments of life, after it has been birthed?

Seek help, Melissa. You’ve got a lot to learn about reproductive biology, and about just being a sane, decent human being.

The post VILE: MSNBC Personality Refers To Unborn Life As “Those Things That Might Turn Into Humans” appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

AHCA Aftermath: Steve Bannon Wanted To Use The Vote To Create “Enemies List”

As was pointed out by Joe Cunningham earlier, former Breitbart CEO, current White House chief strategist, Steve Bannon, thought he would bark out demands and the House Freedom Caucus would fall in line.

Congress isn’t Breitbart, dude.

Add to that a report from the New York Times that Bannon sought to use the AHCA vote as a means of creating an “enemies list.”

A Hill GOP aide involved in last-minute negotiations told the Times that Bannon and White House legislative affairs director Marc Short pressured the president to let the House vote on the ObamaCare replacement bill.

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), however, strongly advised Trump against letting the bill go to a public vote on Friday, as several dozen Republicans remained opposed to the legislation.

Ryan’s concern was that the debacle could harm the Republican majority in the 2018 midterms.

He also doesn’t want to rankle those Republicans they’re hoping to pull on board for legislative moves in the future, such as raising the debt ceiling.

West Wing aides told the newspaper that the White House was privately stunned that the Speaker was unable to master the politics of the GOP conference.

Publicly, Trump and the White House press secretary Sean Spicer expressed confidence in Ryan, stating that the administration is fully behind the Republican House leader.

That means Ryan has a big, fat bullseye on his back.


The post AHCA Aftermath: Steve Bannon Wanted To Use The Vote To Create “Enemies List” appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

Don’t Blame Trump: Repealing Obamacare Was More Of A Ted Cruz Issue

So, who gets to shoulder the blame for the crash-and-burn of the GOP’s Obamacare replacement bill?

So far, I’ve heard the House Freedom Caucus, for their steadfast refusal to accept a plan that looked like a big, fat, welfare check.

Paul Ryan, of course, as House Speaker and avid proponent of the nightmare, as written.

Trump blamed the Democrats for not just forgetting they’re Democrats, forgetting everything that went on during the election, and running to embrace a plan that would overturn their hero, Barack Obama’s signature legislation.

I’ve even heard the theory that the failure of the bill was actually a complicated scheme of Trump’s, devised to force out Paul Ryan.

Yes. There are people out there who are saying Trump lauded this bill, threatened conservatives over this bill, ran with this bill because he wanted it to fail, in order to make Paul Ryan look bad.

To that end, there are people also saying that Trump never really put a lot of stock behind ending Obamacare, and that that was really more of a Ted Cruz thing.


Yep. On Anderson Cooper’s CNN show, “Anderson Cooper: 360,” former communications strategist, Jason Miller, stated that repealing Obamacare was more Ted Cruz’s promise, not Trump’s.

Other Trump apologists on the panel backed him up, asserting that Trump’s main talking points centered around national security and the border.

We know the wall was a big issue, but there is no doubt that Trump repeatedly promised that he would repeal and replace Obamacare, starting on day one.

He was adamant about it.

Frankly, most of the Republicans running in that overcrowded 2016 field wanted to see Obamacare gone, and I have no doubt they still do, but making it happen will not be as easy a fix as some of the issues we see fixed over a half hour on reality TV.

For anyone to say Trump’s hands are unblemished by this, they’re not living in the real world.

I’ll spare you the indignity of having to sit through the whole thing, but the fun begins at about 7:20 into the video.

The post Don’t Blame Trump: Repealing Obamacare Was More Of A Ted Cruz Issue appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

I’M SORRY: Internet Hoax Provocateur Forced To Publicly Apologize (VIDEO)

If you’re one of the creepers I see literally every day on social media, pushing the hoax about Hillary Clinton’s emails, John Podesta, and the supposed child sex ring being operated from the back of a Washington pizza parlor, dubbed #Pizzagate, I recommend you be sitting to read this.

Then again, if you’re a denizen of InfoWars – the cesspool where the rumor was birthed – I have to wonder why you’re at RedState, to begin with. We’re not passing out tinfoil hats and Alien abduction insurance policies, here.

On Friday, with the fear of a lawsuit hanging over his head, the head honcho of InfoWars, Alex Jones, released a video apology to Comet Ping Pong, the pizza parlor implicated in the hoax, as well as to the owner, James Alefantis, personally.

“In our commentary about what had become known as Pizzagate, I made comments about Mr. Alefantis that in hindsight I regret, and for which I apologize to him,” Jones said. The apology came on the same day that Edgar Madison Welch, 28, pleaded guilty to the federal charge of interstate transport of firearms and a local charge of assault with a dangerous weapon.

“We relied on third party accounts of alleged activities and conduct at the restaurant. We also relied on accounts of reporters who are no longer with us,” Jones said. “This was an ever-evolving story, which had a huge amount of commentary about it across many media outlets.”

“If Mr. Alefantis has other objections, we invite him to let us know,” Jones said, inviting Alefantis to appear on his program.

“In issuing this statement, we are not admitting that Mr. Alefantis, or his restaurant, have any legal claim. We do not believe they do,” Jones said. “But we are issuing this statement because we think it is the right thing to do. It will be no surprise to you that we will fight for children across America. But the Pizzagate narrative, as least as concerning Mr. Alefantis and Comet Ping Pong, we have subsequently determined was based upon what we now believe was an incorrect narrative.”

In other words, please forgive our looney tunes story. Don’t sue us.

And looney tunes, it was.

At one point during the heat of the rumor mill, which, not coincidentally was during the run up to the election, Jones even made the statement, “Hillary Clinton has personally murdered children.”

Hillary Clinton is many things, and most of them bad, politically speaking. I do not, however, believe she has personally murdered kids.

Why Jones wasn’t sued into oblivion for that one, I’ll never know.

It is an interesting commentary on social media, as related to human psychology.

A pack mentality sets in, and people will grab on to the barest hint of an inflammatory story, then run with it, as long as it’s a narrative against someone they dislike.

People like Jones have made a career out of exploiting that mentality on the internet, working up the unstable into emotional froth, then walking away.

And unfortunately, there are some who will grab an internet hoax and not let it go, even if the author of the hoax backs down.

I’ve already seen it. #PizzaGate is not just fading away. Nobody else who pushed it on social media is making apologies, and while no one has been physically harmed as a result, yet, when they do, that blood is on Alex Jones’ hands.

The post I’M SORRY: Internet Hoax Provocateur Forced To Publicly Apologize (VIDEO) appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

Fact Check: Did Trump Promise To Repeal and Replace Obamacare On Day One? (VIDEO)

Campaign promises.

After failing to secure the votes needed to make the GOP version of Obamacare a reality, President Trump gave a warning to those who want too much, too fast from the administration.

To be specific, he said he never promised to repeal and replace Obamacare within 64 days.

But did he?

He made a lot of promises on the campaign trail. All politicians do, but this was a big one. And it’s one that matters to Republicans.

Fortunately for us, the wonderful world of video and social media has provided the answer.

Video doesn’t lie.

Now, back to the drawing board. Take the concerns of conservatives into account, and maybe then you’ll have the votes you need.

The post Fact Check: Did Trump Promise To Repeal and Replace Obamacare On Day One? (VIDEO) appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

LATEST POLL: We Need An Independent Commission To Probe Potential Trump-Russia Ties

After Rep. Devin Nunes’ stunt this week, I’m sure the numbers could get higher.

In a Quinnipiac poll released earlier today, it appears that Americans don’t trust the committee that Nunes chairs, the House Intelligence Committee, to get to the bottom of any potential ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russia.

According to a Quinnipiac University survey released on Friday, 66 percent of voters favor an independent commission while 29 percent do not.

Similarly, 65 percent of voters consider Russian interference in the 2016 election a “very important” or “somewhat important” issue.

The poll also found that 63 percent of Americans are “somewhat” or “very” concerned about the president’s relationship with Moscow.

Because everything surrounding this feels corrupted, and no one knows who to trust.

Further, 59 percent of those polled disapprove of how Trump is guiding Washington’s policy toward Russia.

When broken down to party, 61 percent of Republicans approve of the administration’s view of Russia, while 20 percent do not.

There were 1,056 participants in the survey, and it has a 3 percent margin of error.

The post LATEST POLL: We Need An Independent Commission To Probe Potential Trump-Russia Ties appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State

WOW: We Now Know What “Incidentally Surveilled” Means

Lance Armstrong couldn’t backpedal this hard.

I’ve been telling you through the day about House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes’ bizarre, unsubstantiated claims from yesterday’s press conference, where he claimed to have knowledge from unnamed sources, saying that Trump’s transition team may have been “incidentally surveilled.”

I’ve had several people ask what that means, exactly.

We may have an answer, and it’s a really stupid one.

The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes, R-Calif., does not know “for sure” whether President Donald Trump or members of his transition team were even on the phone calls or other communications now being cited as partial vindication for the president’s wiretapping claims against the Obama administration, according to a spokesperson.

“He said he’ll have to get all the documents he requested from the [intelligence community] about this before he knows for sure,” a spokesperson for Nunes said Thursday. Nunes was a member of the Trump transition team executive committee.

The emphasis there is mine.

Get it? He is so unsure of this so-called evidence that he FIRST met with Trump about, and THEN held a presser about (without reviewing it with the committee he chairs, and refusing to reveal his sources to anyone), that now he’s not even sure anyone on Trump’s team was a part of it.

To “incidentally surveil” means to mention someone’s name, in passing, by the way.

Trump’s apologists were breathless after Nunes spoke yesterday.

Those who work with him on the Committee were dumbfounded.

He really did make it seem as if there was some “there” there.

Nevertheless, Nunes called it a “significant” development, and President Trump later said it “somewhat” vindicated his controversial Tweets two weeks ago alleging that President Obama wiretapped him and his campaign.

Based on the limited amount of information provided by Nunes so far, it’s possible that foreign officials were overheard talking about Trump transition team members, one intelligence official speculated, as opposed to transition members participating directly in the communications.

And please, if anybody wants to protest my bringing this up, I’ll save you the trouble: “Liberal,” “cuck,” “You just hate him!” “Why don’t you want to make America great again?”

Ok. Awesome. I know some of you desperately wanted this to be the smoking gun, but it’s not.

It’s also possible the information now cited by Nunes came from emails –- not phone calls –- intercepted by U.S. intelligence agencies.

“We don’t know exactly how it was picked up,” Nunes acknowledged yesterday.


U.S. officials who spoke with ABC News said they assume the reports obtained by Nunes are summaries or other accounts of communications collected under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

That section allows the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on the phone calls and emails of foreigners located overseas.

The officials further stated that it’s unavoidable that some Americans will get incidentally surveilled (see: mentioned) through this process.

That’s not the same as wiretapping.

Intelligence officials also stated that when an American’s name is brought up in this kind of surveillance, that information is never disseminated any more than is necessary, and is closely protected.

“You can only disseminate information about a U.S. person if it is foreign intelligence, or necessary to understand foreign intelligence, or is evidence of a crime” that should be turned over to the FBI, according to Brad Wiegmann, who’s still a top attorney in the Justice Department’s National Security Division.

If it’s “key” for a foreign government to understand that ‘Joe Smith’ is a threat – that he’s a “malicious cyber hacker” for example – “and it was key to know the information, then you might pass Joe Smith’s name,” Wiegmann said. “If it was incidentally in the communication but was not pertinent to the information you’re trying to convey, then that would be deleted. It would just say ‘U.S. person.’ It would be blocked out.”

Nunes stepped in this one.

Now the question is “Why?”

What got him in front of those cameras and those reporters with such flimsy, baseless, nothing?



The post WOW: We Now Know What “Incidentally Surveilled” Means appeared first on RedState.

Source: Red State