Blessings on you and your family and from all the Huckabee staff! I hope you enjoy today’s newsletter.
1. DAILY BIBLE VERSE
“‘If you can’?” said Jesus. “Everything is possible for one who believes.”
If you have a favorite Bible Verse you want to see in one of our newsletters, please email [email protected]
2. “Huckabee” Preview
I hope you’ll join me tonight for a brand new episode of “Huckabee” on TBN. I'll talk to Brett Cooper from the Daily Wire, who was gracious enough to join me at the last minute after the outrageous arrest of originally scheduled guest, Peter Navarro (see below for more on that.) I’ll also talk with conservative journalist Savannah Hernandez about the crisis on the border. But never fear, we’ll have plenty of fun, too, with hilarious comedian Jeff Allen, a salute to National Donut Day, and the music of chart-topping bluegrass group, the Flat River Band.
It all happens at 8 and 11 EST, 7 and 10 CST, and Sunday at 9 EST/8 CST on TBN. To find out how to watch TBN, from local cable and broadcast channels to streaming, visit https://www.huckabee.tv and click on “Channel Finder” on the top menu. You can stream previous episodes, highlights and online-only “Digital Exclusives,” including extended interviews, “In Case You Missed It” and “Facts of the Matter” segments, plus extra performances by our great musical and comedy guests and links to all their sites, at https://www.huckabee.tv. You can also find past shows, highlights and digital exclusives on YouTube and my Facebook page.
3. Abuse of Power
By now, you might have heard about the scurrilous abuse of power by Nancy Pelosi’s illegitimate January 6th Kangaroo Kommittee (Is my verbiage too subtle for you to tell what I think of them?) in having former Trump adviser Peter Navarro arrested for contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate. Frankly, I think contempt is the only rational reaction to this star chamber.
Navarro was on his way to tape an interview on my TBN show when the feds played their role as Pelosi’s personal Stasi. Here is more on the story, followed by my statement on this unconscionable and un-American action.
The outrageous treatment of Peter Navarro is another example of a federal police agency gone mad. Navarro was actually boarding a plane in DC to come to Nashville to be the primary guest on my show this weekend when he was handcuffed and whisked to a DC jail, put in leg shackles and held until his appearance before a magistrate.
He had spoken to the FBI Wednesday and told them if they were going to charge him to call him and he would turn himself in. Navarro literally lives in an apartment NEXT DOOR TO THE FBI! But they had to “make a spectacle” and publicly humiliate a 72-year-old man who has faithfully served his country.
And the “TRUMPED up” charge (emphasis mine) was because he genuinely believes (as I do!) that Nancy Pelosi’s sham committee failed to meet its own rules for how it was to be constituted, but most importantly involves the very serious Constitutional issue of separation of powers in which a partisan, hate-filled gang of House Democrats are demanding that the Executive Branch give over internal documents, notes and other confidential papers from the White House. This is an issue of grave violation of Executive Privilege and should be settled by the Supreme Court.
This entire episode is another example of how the powers of Washington, the Democrat mafia, and the media colluded not only to destroy a man’s reputation and life, but how they have been active partners in shredding the Constitution. These are the REAL insurrectionists!
4. Leftists who attempt to subvert democracy are like cockroaches
They may scatter and hide when you turn the lights on them, but that doesn’t mean they’re gone for good. As soon as darkness returns, they’ll come crawling back out again. For instance, the DHS may have jettisoned its inconveniently attention-getting chief of a new Disinformation Agency (i.e., speech police), but now that she’s gone and our attention is distracted elsewhere, they are still pressing forward with creating that unconstitutional abomination.
And Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg may claim he’s gotten out of the shady funding of leftist groups’ corrupting local election systems to turn out Democrat votes and tilt elections, but don’t be fooled. Despite attempts at rebranding and hiding their actual intentions, the same people just launched an $80 million effort to do the same thing they did in 2020.
This all comes packed in gallons of banana oil, like claiming they “will participate in co-creating values and standards of election excellence which will be rolled out to jurisdictions nationwide, uplifting and advancing the profession of election administration in the years to come.” They also claim to be nonpartisan. Do you swallow any of that?
In reality, the vast majority of the “Zuck Bucks” in 2020 went to turning nonpartisan local election systems into get-out-the-vote operations in heavily Democrat districts. Even the New York Times criticized their “system of political financing, which often obscures the identities of donors,” as “dark money,” calling the network “a leading vehicle for it on the Left.”
Natalie Winters at the National Pulse has more at the link above. If Republicans don’t take legal action to stop it now, they can expect a repeat of the 2020 cockroach infestation.
5. CISA report: Concerns about electronic voting systems
Note to anyone wishing to censor, suppress, demonetize or otherwise interfere with the dissemination of this story: It makes no claim that any vulnerabilities of electronic voting systems were used to change the outcome of the 2020 election. (That’s a separate issue.) But a highly anticipated report by CISA --- the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency – has provided official documentation of the major security flaws posed by Dominion Voting Machines.
As Kyle Becker reports, the CISA findings were issued based on the analysis of J. Alex Halderman of the University of Michigan and Drew Springall of Auburn University.
Their overview lists nine different security concerns. These vulnerabilities “justify the concerns of election observers who pointed out that admin rights could be used to override security features and that the system could potentially be hijacked due to “spoofing.”
The vulnerabilities of the versions of Dominion’s ImageCastX software they were able to test could allow someone to disguise malicious applications on a device, gain elevated privileges and/or install malicious code, and perform arbitrary administrative actions. It gets worse: An attacker could also gain access to sensitive information and perform privileged actions to potentially affect other election equipment (!). Also, the “authentication mechanism” is susceptible to forgery, allowing an attacker to print an arbitrary number of ballots without authorization.
I’ll put it in layman’s terms. This system is a hot mess. And these are the same potential problems that some cyber experts have been trying to discuss for a year and a half.
CISA has a long, loooong list of recommendations for increasing the level of security in future elections. This list is so exhaustive that it’s hard to imagine all of them ever being followed. So, hey --- I have a great idea! Let’s scrap electronic voting systems entirely and go back to physical paper ballots with no connection to the internet, in-person voting except for very specific reasons, photo ID and poll watchers everywhere. That’s the only way we’re ever going to have faith in our elections now.
Importantly --- though the report itself doesn’t get into how the 2020 presidential election might have been affected --- Becker notes that “a number of these mitigation measures were not followed” at that time. These include:
--- ensuring physical security of machines and equipment (there were lost flash drives)
--- broken chain-of-custody procedures (don’t get us started about the drop boxes)
--- machines proven to have been connected to the internet
--- missing or destroyed ballot images
--- using QR codes instead of printouts that can be read by an actual person
Early on, CISA told us, “We can assure you we have utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should, too.” But, as Becker observes, “...CISA’s infamous claim that the 2020 election was ‘most secure in American history’ is clearly disproven by its own report two years after the fact.”
Ever since the election, voters who expressed any concern at all about election security and integrity were condemned for “destroying faith in our democracy.” Why, we were just conspiracy theorists, upset that the election didn’t turn out the way we wanted. But now, after all this time, we find that we were right to be concerned. And the machines themselves were just one facet of that extremely flawed stone that was the 2020 election.
How I wish this "official" vindication made me feel better. But with it coming so late, and knowing how little acknowledgment it will receive, I still feel a little sick.
Take a look at how it's being reported: CBS News twisted the headline to read, "U.S. finds no evidence flaws in Dominion voting machines were ever EXPLOITED." (Emphasis mine.) According to Becker, we don't know how hard they were even looking for that. "CISA can claim that it has no evidence of voting machines being exploited," Becker writes, "but voters are left to wonder if that is because they didn't seriously look."
6. Sussmann colluded with FBI on narrative for DNC "hack"
We offered a theory after Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann walked last week that we now formally call The "Loss Leader" Theory. Just as a retail store might offer some product, such as a jug of milk, at below cost –- a “loss leader” –- to get customers into the store and buy more, so Special Counsel John Durham prosecuted a small case he knew he would lose in the DC courts, to introduce evidence suggestive of far greater misdeeds.
This appears to have been done with Michael Sussmann, even as he walked out of court free and clear on his charge of lying to the FBI. Emails included as part of his trial raise questions as to his role in something else involving the FBI; namely, shaping the narrative of the so-called “Russian hack” of the DNC and the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee). You know, the “hack” for which there is no evidence –- at least that the public has seen –- of it being a Russian hack, or even a hack at all.
THE EPOCH TIMES has obtained trial documents and, in a premium story, reports that “Sussmann proposed alterations to an FBI statement on the hacking of the [DCCC] to avoid undermining the narrative for his clients.” And the FBI bent to his will.
In July 2016, Jim Trainor, assistant director for the FBI Cyber Division, wrote Sussmann, who was representing the DNC and DCCC, to get his “thoughts” on the FBI’s draft response to all the phone calls they were getting on the “Russia hack” story. Sussmann read the draft and wrote back:
“The draft you sent says only that the FBI is aware of media reports; it does not say that the FBI is aware of the INTRUSION [emphasis ours] that the DCCC reported. Indeed, it refers only to a “possible” cyber intrusion and in that way undermines what the DCCC said in its statement (or at least calls into question what the DCCC said).”
Trainer went right along with Sussmann’s proposed changes. Instead of saying the FBI is aware of reporting on “a possible cyber intrusion involving the DCCC,” it would say the Bureau “is aware of the cyber intrusion involving the DCCC that has been reported in the media and the FBI has been working to determine the nature and scope of the matter.”
To provide some context, one day before this email exchange between Sussmann and Trainor, then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed President Obama that Russia was aware of a plan by Hillary to “vilify” her rival, Trump, by “stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.” Days later, the CIA told the FBI they had intelligence showing Clinton’s plan was meant to distract the public from her own scandal, the use of a private email server for classified government business.
Recall that the DNC and DCCC hired the private cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike to investigate the so-called “intrusions.” The FBI opened their own investigation, but they were relying on server images and reports produced by CrowdStrike and partially redacted. The Bureau requested the unredacted documents but never received them. According to another email produced at trial, Sussmann was the point person between the FBI and the DNC/DCCC.
Other emails between Sussmann and Trainor show Sussmann upset that the FBI had announced it was investigating. He requested the Bureau consult him before making public statements about it. A compliant Trainor apologized and agreed. He said the FBI and the “victims” (the alleged hack-ees) would be “equally cooperative partners as we navigate this matter.”
Note that in changing the words of Trainer’s draft, Sussmann was firming up his preferred narrative that this breach DID HAPPEN, not just that it possibly did. He wanted to have no question of this, even though the FBI had not concluded it on their own and would always simply take CrowdStrike’s word. Trainer’s original draft was really more accurate.
So we’ve established that Sussmann was the point man and storyteller for something that still remains a mystery, an event that appears to have set up the whole Russia Hoax. It seems to us that the truth about it might be one of those big-ticket items in the store; Sussmann’s doomed trial on one count of lying was just the jug of cheap milk that got us in there.
I Just Wanted to Say
Thank you for reading my newsletter.