June 4, 2018
|

After reading Kyle Cheney’s piece in POLITICO that mentioned my commentary about Trey Gowdy, I was left with one question: where to start?



Maybe we should take a look at the very first paragraph, specifically the phrase “the President’s unsupported claim...” One has to have been living in a pretty deep cave –- or be in deep denial –- to dismiss the President’s claim as unsupported. On the contrary, we’re finding out more almost every day that lends support to the President’s claim –- so much support that it’s hard to keep up with it all. We KNOW the spy was there, who he is and essentially what he was doing, along with a growing cast of supporting characters. We now have a timeline that is at odds with the evolving story from the FBI/DOJ. From the Strzok-Page texts, John Brennan’s crazed anti-Trump tweets (hard to believe this person actually ran the CIA) and much more, we can glean the motivation. And we have stonewalling like there’s no tomorrow.

No, a phrase like “the president’s unsupported claim” is meant to slide through the reader’s eyes and embed itself in his or her brain without any pesky thinking taking place along the way. I recall the phrase “discredited swift boaters” being used to similar effect when John Kerry was running for President.


Commentary continues below advertisement


As far as we know, Gowdy still hasn’t seen those key documents that have been under subpoena since last August. No one who was at that meeting has said they were produced; as I recall, Mark Meadows said none were offered. Devin Nunes called for them again on Sunday. Gowdy is apparently just taking the bureaucrats at their word. And that --- not the political question of whether or not Gowdy is a loyal Republican – was the focus of my piece. It wasn’t “Wow, Trey Gowdy isn’t thinking like a Republican! Why won’t he support the President?” It was, “Wow, Trey Gowdy isn’t thinking like a prosecutor! What is going on with him?” Other comments cited along with mine in the POLITICO piece were mostly about political loyalty; my commentary was not. Rather, it was about trying to figure out what’s going on, to make sense of something that seems nonsensical.

With all the partisan spin happening on both the left and the right, I’ve tried very hard to stick to facts and not make this about politics. (Keep in mind, pointing out the partisanship of others in my analysis is not, in itself, partisanship.) It’s easy to point fingers at the usual suspects; we can get that anywhere these days. I’d like to think my readers come to me because they’re trying to escape the spin and find out what’s really been happening. I’ve come out in favor of declassifying everything possible without damaging legitimate sources and methods –- operative word: “legitimate” –- and letting the chips fall where they may, regardless of who might or might not be implicated as a result. I was part of Trump’s campaign myself, and, believe me, if I had had any inkling that something nefarious was going on with Russia, I would have been outta there faster than you can say “the President’s unsupported claims.”

I know from personal experience what it’s like to be on the receiving end of partisan wrath (being “in the doghouse,” as Cheney would put it) for deviating from the party line on occasion. Although the quote he chose from my commentary reflects my view, I felt out of place being included in a piece that was primarily about loyalty to the Republican side. There should be no “side” here; if Gowdy has good reason for his odd behavior, okay. But let’s see it.



Cheney --- and Gowdy, too, come to think of it --- might want to read this article by D. C. McAllister. It lends even more support to the conclusion that this investigation was hardly business-as-usual for FBI officials, who deviated from their own guidelines to conduct it the way they did. It was NOT by the book. The FBI has set-in-stone policy regarding the steps of an investigation and the appropriate use of “intelligence agents” (spies) and “confidential sources” (spies) along the way, and the emerging timeline for this case is all wrong. Evidence of a serious threat to national security must be present, and she makes the case that it was not.

For Gowdy to be ignoring that now is truly mystifying, and I’d say the same of any respected prosecutor regardless of party affiliation.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/the-real-reason-why-the-fbi-had-a-spy-in-the-trump-campaign/

LEAVE ME A COMMENT BY CLICKING HERE.  I READ THEM!

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 51-63 of 63

  • Donna Chick

    06/04/2018 11:54 AM

    Governor Huckabee,
    Well everything starts out in these investigation like gang busters then as they might be closing in on some answers all of a sudden things stop progressing. They cannot get the documents or they don't there is any there, there. I sometimes (my own opinion) think that they have something on these that are investigating because everything seems to stop then eventually you hear nothing much more about the investigation. Mr. Sessions stopped or actually never started after he became the AG now Mr Goudy and there have been many more. It is exhausting and discouraging.
    Donna

  • Jacqueline Cory

    06/04/2018 11:43 AM

    I heard the following what Nunes said on Fox News this weekend with regards to what Mr. Gowdy said about spygate: “What Trey Gowdy’s specifically talking about is this small slice of the investigation that we’re looking at as it relates to whether or not an informant or informants were used,” said Nunes, a California Republican, on "Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo."

    He added: “You have to remember that Mr. Gowdy loves the FBI and the Department of Justice. If they’re targeting Russians or Chinese or what have you, that’s what we expect them to do. However, the challenge we have in this is that they actually targeted a political campaign that was Donald Trump. And that’s where I think that even though Mr. Gowdy believes that the president’s not a target of this investigation, his campaign is.”

    It makes a little more sense but still it's being used negatively against the Republicans.
    I appreciate your comments. It does give me a more balanced take on this whole mess.
    Keep your thoughts coming, Mr. Huckabee!

  • Dewaine Sealy

    06/04/2018 11:36 AM

    There was no need for him to defend the actions of the FBI. Unless, for personal reasons he decided to do so. What could be up his sleeve?

  • Art Salo

    06/04/2018 11:33 AM

    What about crazed Trump tweets ? (hard to believe this person actually runs the Country)

  • Jeanette Johnson

    06/04/2018 11:30 AM

    I agree with you Mike. Sadly I am confused about Gowdy. In my book, he is no longer the bulldog he was previously described as. I am just hanging on to God because this situation with Mueller is stressing me out.

  • Brad Bakalyar

    06/04/2018 11:26 AM

    I agree with you again as usual i think heads should roll
    all the way to the top we need to fill the prisons with the real crooks.

  • MICHAEL D LONG

    06/04/2018 11:25 AM

    TALK. TALK AND MORE TALK . HE SAID SHE SAID ON AND ON BOTTOM LINE IF PRES TRUMP DOES NOT ORDER RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS ANS FILES FROM FBI DOJ AND OTHER AGENCIES NOTHING IS GOING TO DONE.......

  • Katherine Witt

    06/04/2018 11:20 AM

    I just read your response to Politico and as one your readers I do turn to you to find out what is going on without the spin so THANK YOU for untangling the media’s knots and keeping your readers up to date with real facts!!

  • Stephen Russell

    06/04/2018 11:19 AM

    CA elections: Voted already by mail, 1.18 M mail ballots recieved already.
    Hope the primaries divide the Dems more.
    & GOP can win some
    Cox= to Trump based on attacks made even by Allen.
    Watch & see
    Host your show in CA, Bakersfield, home to old show Hee Haw.
    IF Dems lose enough votes due to primary system, they can lose midterms

  • Steve Allison

    06/04/2018 11:15 AM

    Good morning Governor! Just want you to know I've started reading your commentaries on a more regular basis. I love the new format, but especially the thoughtful, informed perspective. You are appreciated - Thank you, Steve Allison from San Diego.

  • Edward C Witherspoon

    06/04/2018 10:45 AM

    Maybe there is more to Mr. Gowdy not running for reelection than meets the eye. Soft pedaling on points along the way and now seeming to sell out his own work up to this point. I would hope he isn't selling himself out. I formed an opinion to quickly on his character. I fear that in the pressure cooking air around D C he has not sold himself short.

  • Sandra Boyd

    06/04/2018 10:16 AM

    Forget the news. I read your M Huckabee. Seems as though they write what they want, not right. Thank you Mike Huckabee for you love of God and Country. Keep going Mr. Huckabee.

  • Roderick Williams

    06/04/2018 09:45 AM

    Thank you Mike, I do look to you as a reliable source of real news and always appreciate your commentary. God bless you.

June 4, 2018
|

After reading Kyle Cheney’s piece in POLITICO that mentioned my commentary about Trey Gowdy, I was left with one question: where to start?



Maybe we should take a look at the very first paragraph, specifically the phrase “the President’s unsupported claim...” One has to have been living in a pretty deep cave –- or be in deep denial –- to dismiss the President’s claim as unsupported. On the contrary, we’re finding out more almost every day that lends support to the President’s claim –- so much support that it’s hard to keep up with it all. We KNOW the spy was there, who he is and essentially what he was doing, along with a growing cast of supporting characters. We now have a timeline that is at odds with the evolving story from the FBI/DOJ. From the Strzok-Page texts, John Brennan’s crazed anti-Trump tweets (hard to believe this person actually ran the CIA) and much more, we can glean the motivation. And we have stonewalling like there’s no tomorrow.

No, a phrase like “the president’s unsupported claim” is meant to slide through the reader’s eyes and embed itself in his or her brain without any pesky thinking taking place along the way. I recall the phrase “discredited swift boaters” being used to similar effect when John Kerry was running for President.


Commentary continues below advertisement


As far as we know, Gowdy still hasn’t seen those key documents that have been under subpoena since last August. No one who was at that meeting has said they were produced; as I recall, Mark Meadows said none were offered. Devin Nunes called for them again on Sunday. Gowdy is apparently just taking the bureaucrats at their word. And that --- not the political question of whether or not Gowdy is a loyal Republican – was the focus of my piece. It wasn’t “Wow, Trey Gowdy isn’t thinking like a Republican! Why won’t he support the President?” It was, “Wow, Trey Gowdy isn’t thinking like a prosecutor! What is going on with him?” Other comments cited along with mine in the POLITICO piece were mostly about political loyalty; my commentary was not. Rather, it was about trying to figure out what’s going on, to make sense of something that seems nonsensical.

With all the partisan spin happening on both the left and the right, I’ve tried very hard to stick to facts and not make this about politics. (Keep in mind, pointing out the partisanship of others in my analysis is not, in itself, partisanship.) It’s easy to point fingers at the usual suspects; we can get that anywhere these days. I’d like to think my readers come to me because they’re trying to escape the spin and find out what’s really been happening. I’ve come out in favor of declassifying everything possible without damaging legitimate sources and methods –- operative word: “legitimate” –- and letting the chips fall where they may, regardless of who might or might not be implicated as a result. I was part of Trump’s campaign myself, and, believe me, if I had had any inkling that something nefarious was going on with Russia, I would have been outta there faster than you can say “the President’s unsupported claims.”

I know from personal experience what it’s like to be on the receiving end of partisan wrath (being “in the doghouse,” as Cheney would put it) for deviating from the party line on occasion. Although the quote he chose from my commentary reflects my view, I felt out of place being included in a piece that was primarily about loyalty to the Republican side. There should be no “side” here; if Gowdy has good reason for his odd behavior, okay. But let’s see it.



Cheney --- and Gowdy, too, come to think of it --- might want to read this article by D. C. McAllister. It lends even more support to the conclusion that this investigation was hardly business-as-usual for FBI officials, who deviated from their own guidelines to conduct it the way they did. It was NOT by the book. The FBI has set-in-stone policy regarding the steps of an investigation and the appropriate use of “intelligence agents” (spies) and “confidential sources” (spies) along the way, and the emerging timeline for this case is all wrong. Evidence of a serious threat to national security must be present, and she makes the case that it was not.

For Gowdy to be ignoring that now is truly mystifying, and I’d say the same of any respected prosecutor regardless of party affiliation.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/the-real-reason-why-the-fbi-had-a-spy-in-the-trump-campaign/

LEAVE ME A COMMENT BY CLICKING HERE.  I READ THEM!

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 51-63 of 63

  • Donna Chick

    06/04/2018 11:54 AM

    Governor Huckabee,
    Well everything starts out in these investigation like gang busters then as they might be closing in on some answers all of a sudden things stop progressing. They cannot get the documents or they don't there is any there, there. I sometimes (my own opinion) think that they have something on these that are investigating because everything seems to stop then eventually you hear nothing much more about the investigation. Mr. Sessions stopped or actually never started after he became the AG now Mr Goudy and there have been many more. It is exhausting and discouraging.
    Donna

  • Jacqueline Cory

    06/04/2018 11:43 AM

    I heard the following what Nunes said on Fox News this weekend with regards to what Mr. Gowdy said about spygate: “What Trey Gowdy’s specifically talking about is this small slice of the investigation that we’re looking at as it relates to whether or not an informant or informants were used,” said Nunes, a California Republican, on "Sunday Morning Futures With Maria Bartiromo."

    He added: “You have to remember that Mr. Gowdy loves the FBI and the Department of Justice. If they’re targeting Russians or Chinese or what have you, that’s what we expect them to do. However, the challenge we have in this is that they actually targeted a political campaign that was Donald Trump. And that’s where I think that even though Mr. Gowdy believes that the president’s not a target of this investigation, his campaign is.”

    It makes a little more sense but still it's being used negatively against the Republicans.
    I appreciate your comments. It does give me a more balanced take on this whole mess.
    Keep your thoughts coming, Mr. Huckabee!

  • Dewaine Sealy

    06/04/2018 11:36 AM

    There was no need for him to defend the actions of the FBI. Unless, for personal reasons he decided to do so. What could be up his sleeve?

  • Art Salo

    06/04/2018 11:33 AM

    What about crazed Trump tweets ? (hard to believe this person actually runs the Country)

  • Jeanette Johnson

    06/04/2018 11:30 AM

    I agree with you Mike. Sadly I am confused about Gowdy. In my book, he is no longer the bulldog he was previously described as. I am just hanging on to God because this situation with Mueller is stressing me out.

  • Brad Bakalyar

    06/04/2018 11:26 AM

    I agree with you again as usual i think heads should roll
    all the way to the top we need to fill the prisons with the real crooks.

  • MICHAEL D LONG

    06/04/2018 11:25 AM

    TALK. TALK AND MORE TALK . HE SAID SHE SAID ON AND ON BOTTOM LINE IF PRES TRUMP DOES NOT ORDER RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS ANS FILES FROM FBI DOJ AND OTHER AGENCIES NOTHING IS GOING TO DONE.......

  • Katherine Witt

    06/04/2018 11:20 AM

    I just read your response to Politico and as one your readers I do turn to you to find out what is going on without the spin so THANK YOU for untangling the media’s knots and keeping your readers up to date with real facts!!

  • Stephen Russell

    06/04/2018 11:19 AM

    CA elections: Voted already by mail, 1.18 M mail ballots recieved already.
    Hope the primaries divide the Dems more.
    & GOP can win some
    Cox= to Trump based on attacks made even by Allen.
    Watch & see
    Host your show in CA, Bakersfield, home to old show Hee Haw.
    IF Dems lose enough votes due to primary system, they can lose midterms

  • Steve Allison

    06/04/2018 11:15 AM

    Good morning Governor! Just want you to know I've started reading your commentaries on a more regular basis. I love the new format, but especially the thoughtful, informed perspective. You are appreciated - Thank you, Steve Allison from San Diego.

  • Edward C Witherspoon

    06/04/2018 10:45 AM

    Maybe there is more to Mr. Gowdy not running for reelection than meets the eye. Soft pedaling on points along the way and now seeming to sell out his own work up to this point. I would hope he isn't selling himself out. I formed an opinion to quickly on his character. I fear that in the pressure cooking air around D C he has not sold himself short.

  • Sandra Boyd

    06/04/2018 10:16 AM

    Forget the news. I read your M Huckabee. Seems as though they write what they want, not right. Thank you Mike Huckabee for you love of God and Country. Keep going Mr. Huckabee.

  • Roderick Williams

    06/04/2018 09:45 AM

    Thank you Mike, I do look to you as a reliable source of real news and always appreciate your commentary. God bless you.