August 13, 2019

Today's Edition: 6 minute read


In answer to my commentary about Trump not being a racist, I got a letter from a reader bringing up the controversy over his remarks about U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who was at that time presiding over a couple of civil suits against Trump University...
From John P:
Did you write that there is no proof that Trump is a racist? Paul Ryan called Trump's depiction of Judge Curiel as a Mexican who could not be unbiased the textbook definition of RACISM.
From the Gov:
Trump’s critics –- including Paul Ryan in 2016, though he still supported him for President over Hillary Clinton –- have accused him of saying that U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel couldn’t be fair because he is Mexican. And, yes, if someone made a blanket statement that Mexicans weren’t capable of being fair, that would be racist, very much so. But Trump was talking about a very specific set of circumstances. As the great Scott Adams (creator of “Dilbert” and expert on the psychology of bias) recently noted, “Trump indicated that Judge Curiel’s Mexican heritage might bias him against Trump because the media had painted Trump as an enemy of all Hispanics. In the legal process, calling out potential bias is normal and useful.”
In other words, Trump was talking about his particular case and the fact that he personally had already been painted as anti-Mexican because of the wall issue. Trump was speculating that in this case, being of Mexican heritage might possibly color the judge’s view towards him.


With gratitude,

Mike Huckabee



Castro brothers update

By Mike Huckabee

If Rep. Joaquin Castro thought that his doxing of Trump donors in his district would “shame” them into not supporting Trump, then he really doesn’t understand Texans.  Trump should send him a thank-you note for boosting his fundraising in the Lone Star State.

I’ll bet they’ll also be giving the maximum to whoever runs against Castro in 2020.

Oh, and guess who is doubling down on defending Castro’s reprehensible exposure of private citizens to threats and harassment just for exercising their constitutional right to support a candidate?  That’s right.  It’s like they’re practically twins or something.

Here’s an example of the kind of harassment that Castro has unleashed on his own constituents that his brother, who thinks he has the judgment to be President, is so “proud” of:

Fortunately, not everyone is taking this so lightly.

Let’s hope the House Ethics Committee takes swift action so that any punishment can be imposed before that district gets a new Representative in 2020. 

Liberal strategy on guns: more gun laws

By Mike Huckabee

From the “Never Let a Crisis Go To Waste” File: Politico reports (as if we even needed to be told at this point) that Democrats think their path to victory in 2020 is a push for more gun control laws to combat a rising threat of “white supremacy” that they plan to tie to Trump and his supporters.

Personally, I don’t see slandering half the country and gutting the Second Amendment as a key to winning, particularly when your candidates already want to gut many parts of the First Amendment, do away with the Electoral College and stack the Supreme Court. It makes one wonder if there’s any part of the Constitution or Bill of Rights that they actually like and would leave alone (if elected, would they also repeal the Third Amendment and force us to house soldiers in our guest rooms, or would they only require we do that for illegal immigrants?) 

This is also not a strategy that’s likely to wear well over the long haul. At some point before 2020, the RNC will find a way around the media and social media and let voters know that the El Paso shooter was a radical environmentalist who said he was not influenced by Trump, and the Dayton shooter they’re desperately trying to avoid discussing was a Warren-supporting, socialist gun control proponent. 

Frankly, the naked attempts to fundraise and campaign over the bodies of the victims are already rubbing me, and I’m sure many other Americans, the wrong way.  Take a look at this quote from the Politico story:

“The climate, if we take advantage of it, is better than it’s ever been before,’ Iowa state Rep. Ako Abdul-Samad said after the moment of silence in Clear Lake. ‘If we don’t take advantage of it, then we miss.’”

Does anyone else feel sick to their stomachs to hear a politician talking excitedly about “taking political advantage of this climate” immediately after a moment of silence for the dead?  I suppose we should be grateful that they were actually able to stop themselves from politicking during the moment of silence. 

Arnon Mishkin writing at also believes that building a campaign on hating Trump might work in the Democratic primary, but it’s a “dangerous game,” divisive for the nation as a whole and likely not a winning strategy for the general election.  He’s right, I think most people still want to vote “for” something or someone, not just out of anger and hatred at the other candidate.  Right now, hatred for Trump, open borders and giving out free stuff is pretty much the entire Democratic platform.




The fall of Betomania

By Mike Huckabee

I get the sense that many Americans are already quietly and not-so-quietly starting to express their anger and resentment at being called racists, Nazis, white supremacists, and accessories to mass shootings just because they don’t want to elect some leftist nut President.

For instance, some pundits think “Beto” O’Rourke has reinvigorated his Presidential campaign with his unhinged, foul-mouthed rants against Trump voters and America in general, but I think he’s loaded a cargo of anvils onto a ship that was already sinking.  Other liberals are advising “Beto” to drop out and go back to Texas to run for Senate against John Cornyn.  But Trump won Texas in 2016 by over 52%, and I doubt that Texans will feel like rewarding someone with a Senate seat for calling them racist Nazi murderers.  Compared to that, calling them “Deplorables” was a compliment.

Jeffrey Lord at the American Spectator has a similar take on “Beto’s” implosion.

I think the bloom is off the “Beto” rose, now that many voters have actually seen him in action.  During his Texas Senate race, he was buoyed by tens of millions of dollars (much of it from out of state) and the media acting as his PR agency, but most Texas voters didn’t know much about him other than hearing how cool he was, and they hadn’t really seen him – until the debate with Ted Cruz, when he began self-destructing.  Debates are “Beto’s” Kryptonite.

If I had to compare his career to a movie, it wouldn’t be “The Candidate,” it would be “Lover Come Back.”  In that classic 1961 comedy, ad man Rock Hudson creates a fake TV commercial campaign for “VIP” that mistakenly gets on the air, and suddenly, the public is clamoring to buy VIP.  So Rock has to invent it. 

I think that explains the brief rise and fall of Betomania.  He’s the political equivalent of VIP: a product that, if it weren’t for its slick marketing campaign, wouldn’t even exist at all, so it's constantly having to reinvent itself. 


I wanted to make sure you also read these comments:

First, the leftists tore down the Civil War monuments.  Then it was monuments to the Founders who owned slaves.  Then it was monuments to anyone who ever did anything that isn’t politically correct by current, ever-changing standards, which seems to negate the entire idea of creating “monuments.” 

So that leaves the question: Just who do they think actually deserves a monument to replace all those monuments they tore down?  You might be surprised.  Then again, you might not.



Here’s how you know you’re in the presence of a real whopper: when it’s tweeted out by Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris and even liberal news outlets like call them on it.

For the record: this is not the 5th anniversary of the “murder” of Michael Brown by a Ferguson, Missouri, police officer.  Brown was shot and killed by a Ferguson officer, but an extensive investigation, with both forensic evidence and witness testimony, convinced a grand jury and even the Obama DOJ that the cop acted in self-defense as Brown was attempting to rush him, after already punching him and wrestling with him to try to take away his gun. 

Like the Charlottesville “fine people on both sides” fake Trump quote, “Hands up, don’t shoot” is a cherished narrative that liberals refuse to let die, no matter how thoroughly it’s debunked.  Again, to show how thoroughly, here’s the fact-checker of the Washington Post (that's right: WaPo!) giving Warren and Harris a “Four Pinocchio” lie rating for repeating it and explaining why in detail.

Want more news from Mike Huckabee?  Read the Evening Edition from August 12

A wrap-up of all the news you might have missed yesterday!


Our Daily Verse (NIV)

"Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective."

– Jas 5:16

Did you miss reading a newsletter recently?  Go to our archive here.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Comments 1-3 of 3

  • Vernon R Freeck

    08/15/2019 10:50 AM

    I remember years back we were worried about our government reps were Russian agents planted here to do us in. Now I watch the dems and wonder if this is true now in the way they are trying to upset our way of life to the constitution.

  • Dave Krusemark

    08/13/2019 06:43 PM

    Dear Governor Huckabee, An essay by Michail Cockran appeared in The Federalist today which perfectly expresses my opinion of the role of Christianity in our nation's heritage and future. Please allow me to commend you on your efforts on accurate teaching materials for youth, and call attention to your readers of this well-written piece. Thank you!

  • Stephen Russell

    08/13/2019 11:55 AM

    Gun Laws: Dems DONT want solutions just more laws & pro felon & we lose.
    Dems DONT talk Just demand.
    We lose.