You can’t make this up if you try. No, really. Crosswell’s first finance report is out. It’s incredibly bad. Don’t take my word for it. From Lehigh Valley News:
Crosswell, the latest candidate to enter the race, raised more than $320,929 in just three weeks, records show.
That amount, which came entirely from individual donors, led the field of Democrats. After expenditures, he had $254,003 on hand as of the end of June, according to the reports.
Crosswell resigned from the U.S. Justice Department in protest after the Trump administration opted to drop corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams for political reasons.
His campaign, which has focused on upholding the rule of law, appears to have attracted significant support from the legal community. Dozens of attorneys from across the country have donated to his campaign, records show.
However, it appears almost none of the money he’s raised came from within the district.
LehighValleyNews.com identified only a single donation from within the Lehigh Valley or Carbon County on the 200-page report — a $500 contribution from an Allentown woman.
The dearth of local donations could feed more political attacks that cast him as a carpetbagger. Crosswell, a former Marine, moved to the district earlier this year and switched his party affiliation from Republican to Democratic in December. The Pottsville native had no prior ties to the district other than athletic competitions in high school. His three opponents have accused him of district shopping — a claim Crosswell denies.
For a moment I’ll leave aside the false narrative that the Adams decision pushed him to run and let the rest speak for itself. Croswell got exactly one person to donate to his campaign from the district. One. This guy isn’t even pretending to represent the Lehigh Valley, he’s trying to buy his way into our seat with a bunch of lawyers from North Carolina, DC, California, and God knows where else paying his tab. I’m sure if we looked over their voter registrations, plenty of them are his buddies from his union busting days in the Republican Party, but it really doesn’t matter if they aren’t. They aren’t from the Lehigh Valley. That’s fine with Crosswell though, because neither is he.
I’ll just point out though something that is just as bad, especially if you’re a solid Democrat who believes in the policies and values of the Democratic Party. While raising $321k, he couldn’t find one Democratic group to back him. Not a single PAC gave him money. Not one union. No pro-choice organization. No environmental group. Nobody. This is because he has long held the values of the Republican Party when he went to work and vote. One has to worry now that if he does find a group to give him money, it will be because he basically sells himself. He came into this with none of our values. This whole campaign is being astroturfed by union busters and Beltway elites.
The other two Democratic candidates have not matched Crosswell so far, which can be expected based on past Lehigh Valley congressional primaries. This isn’t a wealthy district, and this happens to be where they made their actual lives and careers. They’re from here, and they’re Democrats. I certainly have my preference, but I could probably deal with either one being our nominee. Being honest about who you are is the first and most important step to asking for someone’s vote.
“Why do all of these rich tech bros think Donald Trump is a moderate? They spend all this money. pushing a right-wing agenda and then people actually believe it’s moderate.”
This was the prompt of a recent conversation I had, and well, it’s a fascinating one. Donald Trump did have a lot of rich “moderates” behind him, didn’t he? Hillary Clinton was simultaneously beat on by alt-left dead-enders for basically being Dick Cheney, and also viewed as too left by a lot of voters. Kamala Harris is about as “normie Democrat” as you can be on policy at this point, but she was viewed as the extremist by a lot of voters, not Trump. Why did this happen?
I tend to not really want “big change” policy moves, and so I have a tendency to like and support actual moderate policy. I think it’s highly important that we don’t mistake actual fairly moderate policy for being a political moderate though. There is no real pocket of voters out there giving you credit for say, taking a moderate position on abortion rights, for example (codification of Roe in it’s original, two-trimester form that allows some regulations of procedures and when you can access care). Not many voters gave Senators any credit for moderate positions on immigration or gun control in the past 15 years. Taking actual moderate policy positions often times leaves you in the bullseye of your own party’s activists and gets you no credit from the opposition.
One of the key reasons both parties (and not at all the only reason) could not properly handle Donald Trump is that both are fairly ideologically homogeneous. Democrats fight over how to get people health insurance, they don’t fight over whether or not to do it. Voters don’t really view you as more moderate for preferring the Affordable Care Act over government Bernie-care for All (it’s not Medicare, really). Same on the Republican side, they have some disagreements over how far to go on deporting illegal aliens and whether or not they’ll allow bare minimum background checks for all gun sales. No one is literally arguing for a path to amnesty or for blocking some gun sales in the GOP. Both parties have their positions, and there are degrees of separation in them, but even a moderate is still basically a member of one or the other. Voters don’t really see moderates as different.
Most of the reason is that lower information voters and honestly voters in general are far less ideological than voters who are activists, staffers, or candidates. They personally hold views that are not always consistent. For instance I know friends that vote regularly and are pro-gay marriage (and lgbtq rights in general) and pro-life. Anti-war and love going to the shooting range. Anti-immigrant and pro-marijuana. Many non-politically active voters actually very commonly hold views that are ideologically contradictory. When they think of a moderate, they think of someone who breaks out from party orthodoxy, like they do. And there’s a lot of them- a third of Americans identify as moderate and 43% consider themselves an independent.
When faced with Trump’s sometimes bizarre campaign positions- being for mass deportation, but against any foreign military action, or being pro-life while also being for ending taxes on tips and social security- a lot of these voters feel more comfortable with that. Very disciplined candidates like Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris actually pay a price for not saying anything all that shocking. Voters who want “moderate” are often times just telling you they want something different, and an ideologically consistent candidate isn’t it.
Obviously identity plays into how a candidate is perceived, and some portion of the public understands the “left-right continuum” in a traditional way. Part of this is just a basic disconnect though. Political people are thinking about moderates as actually being moderate. Normal voters are thinking of moderates as more free wheeling and less careful. That fits Trump perfectly. It’s also now his biggest vulnerability, as he governs. How long until the public realizes he’s the definition of a conservative?
In an earlier post, I told you how Ryan Crosswell is a Republican carpetbagger, running a fraudulent campaign for the Democratic nomination in PA-7. Ryan didn’t grow up in this district, or ever live in it until earlier this year. He registered to vote as a Republican in North Carolina, Louisiana, and Washington, DC (That we know of), and voted in the Republican Presidential primary in every one of Donald Trump’s races for President, so far. He claims he had some epiphany to become a Democrat when Trump’s DOJ decided to drop the charges against Eric Adams, but he purchased his campaign websites long, long before that. He just thinks Democratic voters are dumb enough to be bought off by a Republican from the Beltway.
Despite that, VoteVets and other DC groups are astroturfing together a well-funded campaign for the carpetbagger. He announced that he raised $320,000 in the first three weeks in the race. That’s an impressive amount of money, for regular candidates. This guy is going to need every penny of it though to distract voters from the fact he’s got no connection to this district, and that he’s not a Democrat. Turns out though, he’s got lots of help with that. He doesn’t just have VoteVets helping him, or the mega law firm that he works for in San Diego currently (yes, that’s in California). In fact, the guy is likely being funded by actual Republicans.
Back before Crosswell was working for the Trump Administration he worked for a firm called Littler Mendelson in Charlotte, NC. As they would tell you it, they’re the best of the best in employment law, from the perspective of the employer. Ask literally any labor union in the United States and they’ll tell you they are a notorious anti-labor firm. In regular people speak, Littler Mendelson is a union busting law firm. According to Crosswell’s LinkedIn (above), he specialized in the kind of “non-compete” agreements that the Biden Administration was trying to weaken or end in some cases.
Basically, in addition to not being from here and being a Republican, Crosswell is asking a district that literally was the birthplace of the working class (Bethlehem Steel and Mack Trucks) to elect a union buster. I would laugh at this, if he didn’t have so much money.
Of course Crosswell would raise a bunch of money to try and buy a district he has no relationship to. One has to just ask though- how much union buster money is in that $320,000? Given that nothing in his record suggests that he changed his mind from his previous Republican positions on any other issue, one has to wonder how working on the Eric Adams case changed Crosswell’s career long beliefs in anti-union practices?
Today’s the New York City Mayoral Primary Election, and I’m not extremely excited. On the one hand, Andrew Cuomo winning is the *good outcome*, which in light of recent years tells you a lot. Cuomo’s fall, from a nearly unbeatable and popular governor that was maligned by the far-left is well documented. I would probably prefer to be telling you today that City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams has a chance, but she doesn’t. Either Cuomo wins today, or a complete lunatic nutbag wins.
That’s probably why we’re in this place- a lot of people really can’t stomach voting for Cuomo, even on the second ballot. Is that fair? Probably not. While one could certainly make him shoulder some blame for his handling of nursing homes during COVID, the sexual misconduct accusations that actually drove him from office turned out to be a dud- not a single prosecutor in the entire state took the Attorney General’s report and turned it into anything near a successful prosecution. I don’t think it matters though. Cuomo is just kind of viewed as a mean, loathsome politician. I think a lot of people have figured out that he’s just not that progressive, and he doesn’t do the necessary virtue signaling to make them feel good.
Here is where the alternative should matter, but doesn’t really seem to. New York State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani has all but caught Cuomo, thanks to New York’s stupid “rank choice system,” where being someone’s second, third, fourth, or even fifth choice matters. Most voters who don’t back Cuomo at first, just don’t. They’re seemingly not bothered by Mamdani though. Mamdani calls himself a Democratic Socialist, much like AOC, but he’s honestly mostly just a big government liberal. Mamdani has built up a viral support through his proposals and gained thirty points over the past few months. He has the normal support of progressives like AOC and Bernie that the electorate nationally and statewide in New York has repeatedly rejected, and says the normal nonsense about being a socialist. He’s going to freeze rents. He’s going to make buses free in the city. He’s going to force landlords to keep their buildings at 78 degrees, year round. He’s going to make all the city public schools buildings climate friendly. He’s going to crack down on landlords. Basically everything but a unicorn, free of charge. He’s just going to tax the rich to pay for it all. As long as Albany allows him to, which is probably a long shot since the city can’t do a lot of the things he’s proposing currently. But he’ll do it. Trust him.
Look, the difference between being AOC and winning one of these ridiculous, sleepy summer primaries and being Alessandra Biaggi and losing them is often just how many people give a shit and bother to come. If Mamdani was just the garden variety of leftist and running a race to beat Cuomo, honestly who really cares, right? That would normally be my attitude too. If New York wants to elect a 33 year old that’s promising them lots of things he can’t deliver, have at it. The problem is that these optics aren’t staying in the cities. Whether it’s crime in Chicago, homeless people in Los Angeles, or whatever the hell is happening here, Republicans are running against this. Mamdani takes it to the next level though. That next level, the elephant in the room if you will, is his views on Israel. A race for local office is at least partially being energized by a candidate’s views on a foreign country. Any decent politician would avoid that. It’s basically become the backbone of this race. That may not hurt him in this primary. Bloodlust is a political motivator in the era of Trump. This is a New York Primary, a city which did elect us AOC. And it’s hot outside today. Only the most motivated will vote. Maybe this works in this race. That doesn’t mean much good will come of it.
Look, I don’t know this guy personally. Is he an antisemite? I have no idea, but he certainly says a lot of things I would not say about Israel. If you think the Netanyahu government is an atrocious, steaming, stinking turd, I really don’t have a problem with that position, but I find the discussion of whether Israel should exist or not to be fully offensive. I actually doubt this guy would be “welcoming the Muslim Brotherhood to Gracie Mansion,” and other over-the-top nonsense some people are saying. My guess is he’s another really awful big-city Mayor, like a Brandon Johnson type, who does such a dogshit job that basically everyone agrees he’s bad. He’s going to fail to deliver on almost everything he promises, and two years from now he’ll still be ranting and raving about a foreign policy issue he’s both ignorant on and powerless on. Is there a chance he’ll be better? Sure. It’s highly unlikely though, because he’s promising things he can’t delivering on, and talking about issues he holds no authority on. Electing this guy is placing a big bet on what’s likely a small payout.
New Yorkers, I get it, you’re tired of Andrew Cuomo. He’s not nice. He doesn’t try to make you feel good. If he loses tonight though, you will have created the next right-wing boogie man for Donald Trump to point out to suburban swing voters everywhere. You’re loading another gun for J.D. Vance 2028. Do the right thing. Don’t rank Mamdani.
Sports are hard. Losing is harder. Losing is a part of sports. I try to operate u see the standard that losing alone doesn’t make you a loser. I ran track, cross-country and wrestled in high school, I played baseball and soccer up through seventh grade. I lost a lot. I probably won a little more than I lost, overall, but god did I lose a lot. Losing in individual sports is hard because you’re out there alone to lose by yourself. You can’t blame anybody else. I’d like to think it builds character and teaches lessons. I also tend to think there are less painful ways to do that.
Riley Gaines was a swimmer, a sport that can be as lonely as wrestling or running. You’re in the pool by yourself. Riley Gaines was very good at swimming, and she won a lot. The television screen says she was an SEC champion, and well, that’s pretty great. She finished tied for fifth at the NCAA Championships in the 200 yard freestyle, quite an achievement. Gaines was certainly better at swimming than 99.9% of people are at anything in their lives. If she said that, well, there would be no denying that.
You see though, Riley feels aggrieved. She finished tied with Lia Thomas, a transgender female who swam for the University of Pennsylvania. The NCAA gave the 5th place trophy there on location to Thomas and mailed Gaines her trophy. She still finished fifth, and she eventually got the trophy, I assume. But you know, her feelings. So she start going around and complaining about Lia Thomas being able to compete. Riley doesn’t think trans women should be in women’s sports. The point of my post isn’t to argue and fight about that point, as while I do have concerns about this in combat sports and from a pure fairness angle, I have literally zero expertise on the matter and won’t pretend to know what’s fair and right here. I do know this though- if Lia Thomas wasn’t in the race, if she didn’t even exist, Riley Gaines still would not have won the race. In fact, as I assume it, she would have finished fifth by herself. She would have received the same fifth place trophy, just she would have received it that day. She still would have lost to four other girls. She’s just decided to make it her cause to make sure there’s never anywhere for trans women to compete.
Simone Biles backed off of her attacks on Riley Gaines over the weekend, but I won’t go so easy. Riley Gaines lost a race, quit her sport forever, and cashed in on attacking transgender women. If this were her only cause she had taken up since, I might take it for some sincere issue that mattered to her. It hasn’t been her only issue though. She’s become a pro-life spokeswoman as well, and a surrogate for Trump’s 2024 campaign. Riley Gaines is basically a right-wing hack who happened to finish fifth place in a race once, and now runs around like she finished second to a transgender woman who robbed her of her hard work. She would have finished fifth in that race, regardless. I wonder how many people she has made feel small and unseen by using her considerable talents for this. She may be right, she may be wrong on the merits of her message about the issue. She definitely used this cause to cash in and gain fame and fortune that she probably wouldn’t have gained in the pool.
It has become a near sacred belief for some folks on the internet that they don’t believe the 2024 Election results. I get it, they’re a nightmare. The idea that nearly 50% of the public would re-elect Trump after everything seems impossible. When you understand how close virtually every Presidential Election other than 2008 has been this century though, it starts to make at least some sense though.
Enter New York, specifically Rockland County where I worked on a County Executive race, more than a decade back. It is a politically peculiar place. It’s a very purple county in suburban New York City. It’s got the highest percentage of Jewish people of any county in America. It’s incredibly diverse in general. It’s got super, super wealthy and very working class people living together. It’s a part of the swing NY-17 Congressional District, one of the most competitive in America. It’s really, really expensive to run a campaign there. And they have a rather significant Hasidic Jewish population, now sitting over 50,000 in the district. They tend to vote together, as a block, getting them the name “the block” amongst politicos. Once the leaders decide who they are backing, and to what level, everyone does their job. It doesn’t fit neat partisan or ideological politics, and so it confuses many political class people who are new to the area. This often puts them at odds with other groups in the county, who don’t particularly love their voting power. The East Ramapo School District there has been controversial, but that’s nothing new.
I’m not shocked that a friend sent me an article about a challenge to their 2024 Election results, but I was immediately skeptical. Rockland is the king of weird election results. What’s more, Vice-President Harris underperformed President Biden and Secretary Clinton in general in New York. Senator Gillibrand was facing weak, token opposition at best, and some of the national hot button issues were less so problems for her. When I first looked at Smart Elections’ Blue Sky post comparing Harris and Gillibrand’s numbers in several voting districts, I immediately assumed they are simply “Block” voting districts, where the Hasidic population chose Donald Trump, but still wanted to vote for the incumbent Democratic Senator. There are absolutely districts in Rockland County where Trump probably won almost every vote, and so did Gillibrand. There are a few problems with my explanation though. First, just having the district number isn’t enough for me today to be sure those were “block” districts. Second, the lawsuit does point to other things, like statistical analysis, that suggests a problem. So it’s possible I’m wrong here.
My guess is that Harris generally underperformed fairly popular incumbents across the state, and Rockland was no different. My second thought is that the lopsided districts will be “block” areas. If anyone knowledgeable on the subject comes across this post, please feel free to keep me updated on this.
If you’re from the Lehigh Valley and don’t recognize the guy above, it’s ok, you’re not alone. His name is Ryan Crosswell and until we had a Congressional seat he felt he could win by switching parties, he probably had no idea where we were. Unless you’ve been at party events, you haven’t met him or heard the story he wants you to learn.
What is Ryan’s story? Well he grew up in Pottsville of the 9th District of Pennsylvania, not in the 7th where he’s running. He became a Marine, went off to school, graduated law school, and went to work in both the military and for the Department of Justice. He registered to vote as a Republican in North Carolina, Louisiana, and Washington, DC, from what I’ve been told. He has never actually lived in Northampton, Lehigh, Carbon, or Monroe Counties, the counties in the district. Ryan has voted as a Republican through the Tea Party, first Trump Administration, January 6th, Republican attacks on President Biden through his term, and up until this past December. The timeline that was provided to me:
December 2011: Ryan Crosswell registers as a Republican In North Carolina.
July 2014: Ryan Crosswell registers as a Republican in Louisiana.
July 19, 2016: Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination for president. Ryan Crosswell voted as a Republican.
November 8, 2016: Donald Trump is elected President of the United States. Ryan Crosswell voted as a Republican.
January 2017: Ryan Crosswell begins working for the Trump administration.
August 15, 2017: Trump defends white-nationalists: ‘Some very fine people on both sides’ . . . . Ryan Crosswell continues to vote as a Republican.
January 20, 2018:Ryan Crosswell begins his second year working for the Trump administration.
January 20, 2019:Ryan Crosswell begins his third year working for the Trump administration.
January 20, 2020:Ryan Crosswell begins his fourth year working for the Trump administration.
April 23, 2020:Donald Trump suggests injecting bleach will cure COVID. Ryan Crosswell continues to vote as a Republican.
January 6 . . . .Ryan Crosswell continues to vote as a Republican..
June 24th, 2022: Roe v. Wade is overturned. Trump and the Republican party celebrate the decision. Ryan Crosswell continues to vote as a Republican.
November 15, 2022: Donald Trump launches his third Republican campaign. Ryan Crosswell continues to vote as a Republican.
December 5, 2023: Donald Trump vows to be a dictator on day one. Ryan Crosswell is still voting as a Republican.
May 18, 2024:Donald Trump begins floating the idea of seeking a third term, which is unconstitutional. Ryan Crosswell was still a Republican.
July 19,2024: Donald Trump promises mass deportations if elected. Ryan Crosswell continues to vote as a Republican.
July 15, 2024:Donald Trump secures the Republican nomination for a third time. Ryan Crosswell voted as a Republican.
August 26, 2024:Donald Trump meets with Nayib Bukele to begin planning the illegal detention of American residents in El Salvador. Ryan Crosswell continues to vote as a Republican.
October 22, 2024: Donald Trump issues threat to prosecute political rivals. Ryan Crosswell voted as a Republican.
November 6, 2024: Donald Trump wins the 2024 general election. Ryan Crosswell voted as a Republican. December 27, 2024: Ryan Crosswell decides to run for Congress. Changes Washington, D.C., voter registration to Democratic.
To hear the story as it’s told to me, this guy voted as a Republican in the 2012 Election, then again in the 2016 Election, took a job in the Trump Administration in 2017, re-registered as a Republican and voted in the 2020 Election, and was a Republican through the 2024 Election. His story is of course that he registered as a Republican many years ago, in the Bush 43 Administration years, when that President was lying about a war that cost tens of thousands of Americans their lives, trying to open up secret prisons for torture operations not allowed to be carried out in America by law, was firing U.S. Attorney’s without cause, conducting massive unapproved warrantless wiretapping, passing the Patriot Act, and otherwise trampling on the rule of law. His defenders have suggested that Crosswell was not an ideological or active Republican. They say he was non-partisan because of his government work, and really just left his registration alone. He re-registered at least three times as a Republican that I see, and was registered as a Republican for all three of Trump’s runs. He went to work for Trump’s DOJ in 2017. It’s been also provided to me now that while he was mailed a ballot in the crucially important 2024 Presidential Election, he didn’t return it. I definitely have questions. He definitely does not seem to have held any meaningful Democratic views through the Iraq War, Obama years, first Trump Administration, the ending of Roe v. Wade, or at any other pivotal point.
Now, I’m not against converts, particularly given how terrible this Trump Administration seems to be doing. Let’s just say though that the more you tolerated, the more skeptical I am. When Trump mocked the disabled reporter, when he called Mexicans drug dealers and rapists, when the Access Hollywood tape dropped, when he did the first Muslim ban, when he appointed ideological extremists to the Supreme Court, when his supporters stormed the Capitol on January 6th, when Roe v. Wade was overturned, when Trump said he wanted to be a dictator, when he accused immigrants of eating cats and dogs, all of that did not cause Crosswell to denounce his Republican registration. What we are asked to believe is that dropping the Eric Adams indictment was the last straw that made Croswell switch parties. Should we believe it? He entered this race on June 9th. He says he left DOJ on February 17th. He bought his websites for his run in December. We know all the things that didn’t make Ryan Crosswell leave the Republican Party. It certainly appears you can add dropping the Eric Adams prosecution to that list. He had made his decision to switch parties and move to a district he never lived in before the Adams’ prosecution was even able to be dropped.
I will say, it’s honorable that Crosswell defended his country, and he has an impressive academic history that suggests he’s a smart person, but our Republican Congressman Ryan Mackenzie can claim those things too, even after he recently voted to take health care from over ten million Americans. Crosswell could have moved home to the 9th Congressional District and ran in the open Republican Primary for 2026, but for whatever reasons he has decided to come run here in the most purple district in the country. The House Republicans will spend millions calling him a hypocrite, a liar, and citing his own contradictory history to make Republicans and Democrats alike hate him. There’s a long campaign to run, and maybe he’ll prove me to be wrong here, but he seems like a tremendous risk for Democrats to take.
I read today’s Politico piece about Biden Administration alums being mad about Karine Jean-Pierre’s upcoming book. I’ll be honest, I went into the piece expecting to agree with them. I didn’t think she was a very effective Press Secretary. I did think she was self-promoting. I had my biases. Then I read the article. Karine Jean-Pierre is right. From what it sounds like her book is going to say, she’s also writing something that absolutely, positively, without one shadow of a doubt had to be written.
Joe Biden’s White House never behaved as Joe Biden’s White House. It never did feel loyal and authentic to Joe’s brand. I would have guessed that Jean-Pierre was a part of that. It definitely appears not to be so. Her discontent with the decision of party elites to dump Joe Biden in last summer’s “switcheroo” was probably shared by a larger number of people than the margin of defeat for Vice-President Harris. Essentially a group of donors and a few has-been high level Democratic elected officials decided to nuke his re-election over their concerns and nominate someone who could not possibly win (This would have been true with virtually any Democrat, for the record.). What I think is more nauseating for some of us is the continual patting on the back that Beltway Democrats still give themselves for doing this. It failed miserably. There is nothing to be proud of. I was fine voting for Vice-President Harris myself, but I said on the day he dropped that she had no chance. Any non-brain dead Democrat knew the election was over when Biden dropped out.
I rarely read these books, so don’t hold your breath that I’ll read it. I will say this though- I’m glad someone is doing the pushback. While anonymous aides and donors further their narrative through corporate tools like Jake Tapper, the truth is very clear and obviously in front of us- the Democratic Party nuked their only chance to win because many of the people tasked with keeping the party in power never really wanted him anyway. Would Biden have won? His poll numbers were really not all that much changed after his June debate. We’ll never know. The disloyalty to him made it virtually impossible anyone was going to win though. Maybe it was mishandled from the decision to run again, maybe we blew it in June, but who cares? The incompetence at the high levels was laid bare before us, and I’m glad someone said it.
Allegations about the U.S. government hiding extraterrestrial beings or technology often point to specific locations, primarily based on whistleblower claims, declassified documents, and popular culture. These claims lack definitive evidence and are frequently dismissed by official sources, but they persist in public discourse. Below are the key sites commonly mentioned, based on available information, including recent web sources and posts on X:
Area 51, Nevada:
Claims: This secretive military base, part of the Nevada Test and Training Range, is the most famous alleged storage site for alien spacecraft and bodies. Whistleblower David Grusch, a former Air Force intelligence officer, testified in 2023 that the U.S. government has recovered “non-human” biologics and spacecraft, with Area 51 often cited in related conspiracy theories. X posts, like one from @uBF2fV1cVQxRjQo in 2023, claim “dozens of alien bodies” are stored there, though these reference unverified sources, including a video flagged as containing fake or unrelated content. Another post from @1996ID4 in 2024 claims Area 51 has held an alien spacecraft and three preserved bodies for nearly 40 years, calling it a “win for big tin foil” but offering no evidence.
Official Response: The Pentagon and the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) deny these claims, stating in a 2024 report that no credible evidence supports extraterrestrial activity or storage at Area 51. The base is known for testing classified aircraft, like the U-2 and F-117 Nighthawk, which may explain some UFO sightings.
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio:
Claims: This base, particularly its Hangar 18, is frequently mentioned as a storage site for alien craft and biologics, especially tied to the 1947 Roswell Incident. A 2023 X post by @UAPJames cites rumors among staff about “bodies stored in freezers” at Wright-Patterson, referencing journalists George Knapp and Chris Sharp. Another post by @planethunter56 in 2024 claims the base stores “recovered craft/NHI biologics,” though without substantiation.
Official Response: The Air Force’s 1995 “Roswell Report” concluded that materials recovered near Roswell were from a classified balloon project, not extraterrestrial. AARO’s 2024 report found no evidence of alien storage at Wright-Patterson, attributing claims to misinterpretations of classified programs.
Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada:
Claims: Less commonly cited, Nellis is mentioned in some conspiracy circles as a “spaceport” for non-human intelligence (NHI) ships or a base for extraterrestrial entities. An X post by @planethunter56 in 2024 alleges it serves as a “Tall White home” and spaceport, but this lacks any verifiable backing and leans heavily on speculative lore.
Official Response: No official reports or investigations link Nellis to extraterrestrial activity. It’s a major testing and training site, often associated with Area 51 due to proximity, which may fuel speculation.
Porton Down, United Kingdom:
Claims: Though not a U.S. site, recent X posts from April 2025 (e.g., @TruthSeeker84x3, @Lizzie_d30, @Sheeraz037) highlight claims that this British defense laboratory stores alien bodies. These stem from a news article, but the posts express skepticism about government denials, with @TruthSeeker84x3 questioning official trustworthiness.
Official Response: Porton Down’s official statements deny such claims, focusing on its role in chemical and biological defense research. No credible evidence supports extraterrestrial storage there.
Other Alleged Sites:
Dulce Base, New Mexico: An unverified underground facility rumored to house aliens, mentioned in fringe theories but absent from credible reports or official investigations.
Kona Blue Program: A proposed Department of Homeland Security initiative, referenced in AARO’s 2024 report, was allegedly meant to cover up “nonhuman biologics” but was rejected for lacking merit. It’s not tied to a specific location but fuels speculation about secret programs.
Overseas Facilities: The @planethunter56 X post vaguely mentions an overseas building used for “laudatory purposes,” but this is too ambiguous to verify.
Critical Analysis:
Lack of Evidence: Despite high-profile claims, like Grusch’s 2023 testimony about a “multi-decade” UAP retrieval program, no physical evidence—photos, documents, or artifacts—has been publicly verified. AARO’s 2024 report, based on 80 years of investigations, found “no empirical evidence” for extraterrestrial technology or bodies, suggesting many claims stem from misidentified classified projects (e.g., high-altitude balloons, stealth aircraft). Grusch himself admitted his knowledge is second-hand, based on interviews with 40 witnesses, and he couldn’t share specifics in public.
Misinterpretation: AARO notes that witnesses often mistook sensitive U.S. programs for alien activity, citing examples like the F-117 Nighthawk, which one interviewee claimed was an extraterrestrial craft.
Cultural Influence: Public belief, reinforced by media like The X-Files and viral X posts, amplifies these narratives. A 2019 Gallup poll found 68% of Americans believe the government hides UFO information, showing widespread skepticism.
Secrecy Concerns: Whistleblowers like Grusch and Luis Elizondo (2024 testimony) argue excessive secrecy hides UAP programs, potentially misallocating taxpayer funds. However, their claims remain unverified, and AARO denies any cover-up.
Sentiment on X: Recent X posts reflect distrust in government denials, with users like @TruthSeeker84x3 questioning official narratives about Porton Down. Others, like @1996ID4, treat Area 51 claims as a lighthearted victory for conspiracists, while @planethunter56’s detailed list of sites leans into speculative enthusiasm without evidence. These posts highlight ongoing public fascination but lack credible substantiation.
Conclusion: The most frequently alleged U.S. sites for storing aliens or extraterrestrial technology are Area 51 and Wright-Patterson AFB, with Nellis AFB and vague overseas locations mentioned less often. Internationally, Porton Down has surfaced in recent claims. However, no concrete evidence supports these allegations, and official reports consistently attribute sightings to terrestrial technology or misidentification. The persistence of these claims reflects distrust in government transparency, amplified by whistleblower testimony and social media, but without verifiable proof, they remain speculative. If you want me to focus on a specific site or dive into a particular claim, let me know!
The JFK Files are many pages. So I asked Twitter/X’s AI, Grok to answer an easy question- are there any bombshells? Here’s what I got:
The newly declassified JFK assassination files, released in March 2025, contain over 77,000 pages of documents. While they provide details on CIA operations during the early 1960s, particularly in Cuba and Mexico, no major revelations directly challenge the Warren Commission’s conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in assassinating President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963. Here are the key points:
CIA Surveillance and Operations: The files reveal specifics about CIA surveillance of Oswald in Mexico City, where he visited Soviet and Cuban embassies months before the assassination. They also detail covert operations, like tapping phones in Mexico City and infiltrating Fidel Castro’s government with agents, including 14 Cuban diplomats on the CIA payroll. One document mentions a CIA plot to contaminate Cuban sugar shipments to the Soviet Union with a chemical to ruin its taste.
JFK’s Mistrust of CIA: Unredacted memos, such as one from Arthur Schlesinger Jr., highlight Kennedy’s concerns about CIA influence, noting that nearly half of U.S. embassy political officers in 1961 were CIA agents. This underscores tensions between JFK and the agency, though it’s not directly tied to the assassination.
No Smoking Gun: Experts like Jefferson Morley call the release significant for transparency, shedding light on CIA propaganda and Castro assassination plots. However, historians like Fredrik Logevall and Timothy Naftali say nothing upends the lone gunman theory. The files don’t include some expected records, like 2,400 newly discovered FBI documents or certain IRS files.
Privacy Issues: The release controversially included personal information, like Social Security numbers of House Select Committee on Assassinations staff, raising concerns about sloppy handling.
Conspiracy Theories Persist: Despite no earth-shattering evidence, the files fuel speculation due to their volume and details about CIA activities. Posts on X claim “bombshells,” but these often exaggerate existing theories, like unverified CIA conspiracies, without concrete proof.
The documents enrich Cold War history but don’t resolve the assassination’s core questions. If you’re chasing a specific angle—like a particular document or theory—let me know, and I can dig deeper
Apocalypse Vibes 