Latest News

March 24, 2023



Blessings on you and your family from all the Huckabee staff! This newsletter includes  two of my articles that have been recently been flagged and demonetized by Google.  These articles have been labeled dangerous, derogatory, unreliable and harmful.


With gratitude,



6 Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. 7 And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Philippians 4:6-7

Google Says This Is "Dangerous or Derogatory:" 

Pope calls gender ideology “one of the most dangerous ideological colonizations”

Pope Francis has a reputation for liberalizing the Catholic Church. On LGBTQ issues, he’s backed same-sex civil unions and opposed laws criminalizing homosexuality. But endorsing transgenderism is a line that he refuses to cross.

In an interview with an Argentine newspaper, the Pope called gender ideology “one of the most dangerous ideological colonizations” in the world today. He said, “Some people are a bit naive and believe that it is the way to progress.” But it’s dangerous “because it blurs differences and the value of men and women.”

The Pope said these people “do not distinguish what is respect for sexual diversity or diverse sexual preferences from what is already an anthropology of gender, which is extremely dangerous because it eliminates differences, and that erases humanity, the richness of humanity, both personal, cultural, and social, the diversities and the tensions between differences.” 

He added, “All humanity is the tension of differences. It is to grow through the tension of differences. The question of gender is diluting the differences and making the world the same, all dull, all alike, and that is contrary to the human vocation.”

If you had to point to a case that was ground zero for the push to give confused children dangerous chemicals and irreversible surgery to “transition” them to the opposite gender (a biological impossibility) rather than the mental health care and support they need, it would be the case of Jazz Jennings.

Born Jared Jennings, he decided he was really a girl at age six. His parents (especially his mother) not only indulged but encouraged this; and her son became the first “trans” child celebrity, dressing as a girl in glittery outfits, starring in reality shows, and receiving the fawning celebrity interview treatment from Oprah, Barbara Walters and many more. At 17, while still a minor but after years of puberty blockers, Jennings underwent multiple surgeries to try to convert his male genitals to female. This is what’s now being sold to us as the only formula for happiness for “trans kids.”

But Megan Fox at PJ Media reports that it hasn’t led to happiness for Jazz Jennings.

The damage from years of puberty blockers made the surgery more difficult. It was botched and had to be redone, which resulted in continuing pain, rapid 100-pound weight gain, depression, anxiety and other mental health problems that were likely always there in some form and should have been treated as mental health problems. Jennings still has to undergo two hours a day of painful medical treatments due to the surgery. But his mother, who pushed him into a lucrative career as a trans kid reality star, is still all-in as the head of an organization promoting more “transing” of children.

“Jazz” Jennings is now 22 and still has a reality show, but it’s a sobering watch and a cautionary tale. Jennings recently broke down on it and cried, “I just want to feel like myself. All I want is to be happy and feel like me and I don’t feel like me ever!”

It’s tragic that this poor child was misled into trying to be what he could never be instead of being taught that true happiness only comes from being content with the way God made you. But it would be even more tragic if we let political activists, deluded parents and greedy quacks do the same thing to thousands more innocent and confused children that they did to “Jazz” Jennings.


Google Says This Is "Dangerous or Derogatory:" 

January 6 video: “the truth is out there,” PART 2

Tucker Carlson’s Monday night presentation on the “new,” previously hidden January 6 video caused the predictable uproar from the left, who just can’t stand that you got to see anything they didn’t want you to see.

Before we get into Tuesday’s installment, here are some highlights --- and lowlights --- from the reaction to Monday’s show…

First, Officer Brian Sicknick’s family is outraged that Tucker used video to show that he was not murdered by J6-ers but rather, as was later determined, passed away from natural causes the day after. Of course, they’re calling for Tucker to be “silenced.”

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE: At last “the truth is out there” about January 6

Recall that the Pulitzer Prize-winning NEW YORK TIMES had wrongly reported that Officer Sicknick was beaten to death on January 6 with a fire extinguisher blow to the head. Though they later retracted this, the idea that he was “slain” became part of the J6 lore that many still believe. After the medical examiner determined that he’d died of natural causes --- two strokes --- his family still maintains that his death resulted from a beating, and/or pepper spray, when there was no evidence of this and the officer seemed fine in video taken later that day. Also, he wore a helmet.

We’ll never know if the stress of that day indirectly contributed to his medical problem. But even that is a far cry from the lie about insurrectionists beating him to death.

The family has released a lengthy statement, a vicious diatribe against “Supreme Leader Trump” (“as corrupt and evil as Vladimir Putin”), Tucker Carlson (“delusional”) and FOX NEWS (“like Pravda”; “the propaganda arm of the Republican Party”), berating those who present Ashli Babbitt (“a criminal”) as “some kind of martyr for being shot in the process of breaking into the Capitol building.” Ashli was a petite, unarmed woman who had not broken into the Capitol building. We’ve covered the details of her tragically unnecessary death at length.

If they’re upset that the Capitol and DC Metro Police were “incredibly outnumbered,” they might want to ask why House leadership allowed that situation. Tucker was NOT “downplaying the horrid situation faced by the...police,” as they claimed. Just the opposite: he denounced the shameful lack of back-up security that day. Do they even know President Trump approved the deployment of 20,000 National Guard troops and that Nancy Pelosi turned his offer down?

Tucker is right to say this was not an insurrection. There was violence in the crowd at certain entrances to the Capitol, but the building is so huge and sprawling that many hundreds of peaceful protesters had no idea it was even happening. To acknowledge that most protesters were peaceful in no way excuses the violence.

Sicknick’s family members are speaking from a deep well of grief and don’t understand we need the full picture of what really happened. It doesn’t make him any less of a hero in anyone’s eyes. And if this fine officer actually had been killed with a fire extinguisher, Trump supporters would want to know and would be just as horrified as anyone else.

What concerns us is that Democrats scrimped on security for Trump’s event --- I believe deliberately --- and then exploited Officer Sicknick’s death for propaganda purposes. The story that he was “slain” by a “deadly insurrectionist mob” was a politically useful lie.

And here’s a piece of information you won’t find just anywhere: as THE NEW YORK POST reported three days after his death, Officer Sicknick’s friend Caroline Behringer said he’d been a Trump supporter who’d even written to his congressman to oppose Trump’s impeachment. This opinion piece by Matthew Schmitz includes snippets of letters he wrote, offering insight into why he supported Trump instead of government insiders. Perhaps Sicknick’s family is not aware of his views.

Moving on...Tucker’s producers determined that the J6 Committee added those sounds of crowd mayhem --- shouting, screams --- to the video they played in their hearings. There’s no debate about this; the closed-circuit TV (CCTV) was video-only, no audio recording at all. The NEW YORK POST called this a “deceptively edited primetime drama, produced by a former ABC NEWS president for maximum emotional impact.”

President Trump is now calling for the release of J6 detainees, some of whom are still being held pending trial over something that happened over two years ago. He praised Tucker and called this new evidence one of the “biggest scoops” in American journalism. “’Trump’ and most others are totally innocent --- LET THEM GO FREE, NOW,” he posted on Truth Social.

Now let’s turn to reactions from Senate Republicans, most notably Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Sadly, this news is not good. As Tristan Justice reports in THE FEDERALIST, “Senate Republicans condemned blockbuster reporting from FOX NEWS’ Tucker Carlson Tuesday, based on Democrat talking points.”

Regarding Tucker’s presentation, McConnell said, “I want to associate myself entirely with the opinion of the chief of the Capitol Police about what happened on January 6th.” Chief Tom Manger had sent a memo to his department calling Tucker’s coverage “filled with offensive and misleading conclusions.” North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, North Dakota Sen. Kevin Cramer (who misquoted Tucker), South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds and South Carolina Sen. Lindsay Graham were also dismissive. Mitt Romney compared Tucker to INFOWARS’ Alex Jones.

I think McConnell, and apparently Chief Manger, both fail to understand that we’ve already seen the violence. That video was presented over and over. We know about the violence. THIS is the video that until now we have NOT seen. This is “the rest of the story.”

Commentator J. D. Rucker said Tucker did “a very good job of highlighting some of the deception” surrounding January 6. He suggested four things that need to happen now:

1. (echoing President Trump) Release all political prisoners. In this, Rucker goes farther than we might, saying to release them ALL because “events that led to those crimes were manufactured...coordinated for the sole purpose of building the insurrection narrative.” True, but, as we’ve said, that doesn’t excuse actual violence and vandalism.

2. Make the tapes public. That would be a YES.

3. Investigate, charge, arrest and prosecute everyone complicit in the January 6 lies. What say you? Jail time for the likes of Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger, Adam Schiff and, as Rucker says, “their merry bank of evildoers”? Well, falsifying evidence is a crime, and it seems the committee did that. We’re not attorneys and neither is Rucker, but prosecution is something to explore. Also civil litigation.

4. Keep the flow of information coming. Rucker doesn’t want this to be “a nuclear attack followed by a press release.” Make documentaries. Drop bombshells. We have to counter “two years’ worth of gaslighting and propaganda that have brainwashed most Americans into thinking the mostly peaceful events that occurred on January 6, 2021, were somehow on par with 9/11 and Pearl Harbor,” he says.

Rucker has some great ideas for being “patriotic in public” and I hope you read them. As he says, “One episode of Tucker Carlson isn’t going to make a dent.”

Moving to Tucker’s presentation Tuesday night, he first reminds us that in some cases, the DOJ didn’t share exculpatory evidence with attorneys for J6 defendants, violating their constitutional rights. Here’s his opening monologue, which also reviews major points from the previous night.

“In free countries,” he said, “governments do not lie about protests as a pretext to get more power for themselves. They don’t selectively edit video for propaganda purposes and then lie about them in fake hearings and show trials. But that’s exactly what happened, and every member of Congress should ask WHY that happened.”

Rather than asking why, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer called for the censorship and demanded that FOX NEWS stop Tucker from running “a second segment of lies.” Schumer ominously said, “Conduct like theirs is just asking for another January 6 to happen.”

Needless to say, Tucker’s show went on as planned.

Tucker also brings up Sen. McConnell’s objections, along with those of the other GOP senators mentioned above. “So it’s actually not about left and right,” he says, “not about Republican and Democrat. Here you have people with shared interests…” It’s a club, he said, and they’re all showing their membership cards.

Finally, Tucker addresses the utter lack of preparedness for this huge event, despite ample warning of potential disturbance. Apparently, the front-line officers on duty were not aware of this situation and were overwhelmed. This failure of communication “has never been explained.”

He goes to an interview he did with former Lt. Tarik Johnson, a 22-year veteran of the Capitol Police who on January 6 was responsible for security during election certification. Now, here’s something strange: the Committee never called him to testify, even though he really wanted to and prayed they would ask him. “I guess the focus was on Donald Trump,” he said, “and not the failures of the Capitol Police.”

He told Tucker that on January 6, nobody answered his numerous pleas for help over Capitol Hill Police radio frequencies, even after protesters began entering the Capitol. He’s still baffled as to why. Assistant Chief (in charge of intel operations) Yogananda Pittman, he said, kept needed information about the protest from front-line officers. When he just couldn’t raise anyone to give him authorization to evacuate Senators, he made the judgment call to go ahead anyway.

As Tucker explained, he wasn’t rewarded for his quick thinking. Instead, he was punished because outside the Capitol, he was photographed wearing a MAGA hat that someone in the crowd had handed him. He says he put it on to help him get through the crowd while trying to rescue fellow officers who were trapped inside the building. It was for de-escalation --- smart thinking! But “for the crime of wearing the Trump hat, Johnson found himself suspended. Ultimately, he resigned from the force and lost his pension.”

He now has a part-time job moving furniture. Yogananda Pittman, on the other hand, was rewarded two days after the riot for her apparent ineptitude. She got promoted to acting chief of the Capitol Police. Just last month, she moved to a prestigious job as head of security at UC Berkeley, “which is right outside Pelosi’s congressional district,” Tucker notes.

Johnson told Tucker he was “shocked” by the partisanship he saw within the Capitol Police after January 6. Historically, they’ve always been neutral, but no more, it seems.

Be sure and also see Tucker’s interview with Julie Kelly, who wrote the book JANUARY 6, as she talks about the situation faced by current J6 detainees, some of whom have been jailed for 26 months. She says the federal judges in DC are “the real villains here.” Tomorrow we’ll talk more about the fate of these political prisoners.

Iran Strike

Please join me in praying for the family of an American contractor killed in an Iranian drone strike on a coalition base in Syria, and for another contractor and five US service members injured in the attack.

In retaliation, the Biden Administration ordered several precision strikes on Iranian forces in Syria. The Pentagon issued assurances that the response was targeted and limited to prevent escalation. That assumes we’re dealing with a rational nation. Bad assumption: it was just reported as of Friday morning that following the retaliatory strikes, missiles rained down on a US base in Syria’s Al Omar region. Please pray for the safety of the people there as well.

Personally, I preferred Iran when it was hamstrung by sanctions and not flush with billions of dollars from selling oil that we used to produce. But I guess to save the planet, we have to let people buy Iranian oil instead of American oil, which is cleaner. Please note that I didn’t say any of this made sense.

No Trump grand jury this week; case might crash and burn

Never mind!

That was essentially the story on Thursday when the grand jury looking into a payment made on President Trump’s behalf to porn actress Stormy Daniels for a non-disclosure agreement (NDA)  didn’t meet at noon as planned.  Their meeting on Wednesday didn’t happen, either --- and that was when they’d been widely expected to indict Trump on a bogus charge of violating campaign law.

New evidence in the case, in the form of Monday’s testimony by “star” witness Michael Cohen legal adviser Robert Costello (who turned out to be the real star) and a letter that backed up his claims, reportedly showed them Trump hadn’t been involved in this payment at all and also that it had been made out of Cohen’s personal funds, not campaign funds.  (Cohen’s work for Trump was separate from the campaign.)  Costello also testified that Cohen would’ve said anything as part of his plea deal and had lied “hundreds of times. 

What is a grand jury supposed to do with THAT?  Well, with Trump looking even more innocent than the proverbial ham sandwich, they should just vote to drop the case.  But to do that, they have to be there.  Since the grand jury normally meets Mondays, Wednesday and Thursdays, we’ll be waiting till next week to see what Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is going to do with the hot mess he created.

As for the ham sandwich, Jack Posobiec tweeted, “They say any prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich but Alvin Bragg messed up and ate the ham sandwich before the jury was seated.”

Nick Arama at REDSTATE reported on Monday that Costello said he thought he’d gotten through to some on the grand jury.  But to indict, Bragg wold need only to hold onto a simple majority; it’s not a unanimous vote as some might think.

When Bragg first assumed his office in January 2022, even he hesitated to pursue the case and suspended it indefinitely.  As you know, federal prosecutors passed on it as well, and the Federal Election Commission took no action.  We’ve brought you legal analyses concluding that the case was beyond just weak.  It smelled so bad that former assistant U.S. attorney (for that same district) Andrew C. McCarthy --- no fan of Trump --- called it “nakedly political.”

So between now and next Monday, the big question for us will be why Bragg would pull this now, after choosing inaction in his first days as DA.  The announcement that he would pursue indictment came soon after Trump announced he’d be running for President again in ‘24, so the timing is suspect.  And the fact that Bragg’s campaign for DA was lavishly funded by over a million dollars (!) in donations from George Soros and the Soros family would cause one to assume that whatever he does is likely at Soros’ behest.  It appears that Soros essentially bought him that seat.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy called Bragg’s actions in this case an abuse of power and is investigating whether or not he’s used any federal funds to “subvert our democracy by interfering in elections with politically motivated prosecutions.”  Using lawfare to take out a former President and the leading GOP candidate for the next presidential ballot could hardly be of greater political significance.  It should be undertaken only in response to serious criminality.  If you think this looks like a job for the subcommittee investigating the “weaponization” of government, you’re right. 

Bragg’s fervor to “find” a crime and stretch the law to be able to charge Trump with a felony seems even more inappropriate for someone who routinely downgrades the charges in his prosecution of serious crimes in his city.

House committees can’t stop Bragg from continuing to play Captain Ahab, but they can expose him and his efforts for what they are.  Bragg --- with lots of help from the media, of course --- is accusing Republicans of overstepping their bounds if they dare to scrutinize his legal fiefdom.  Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, chair of the House Judiciary Committee, spoke with Laura Ingraham Thursday night about this, saying Bragg’s use of federal dollars in the DA’s office entitles them to look at what’s going on there.

Jordan accused Bragg of “obviously” interfering with a federal election, noting Bragg’s decision to pursue Trump only after he became a presidential candidate and “even more importantly,” when he is “leading in every single poll.”

Jordan also brought up the possible influence of Bragg’s two assistants who resigned over Bragg’s decision not to charge Trump.  Never mind that their main witness was a serial liar; their resignations over not going ahead had gotten the left “all fired up,” Jordan said, which created much more political pressure on Bragg to do it after all when Trump became a candidate.

“The only thing that changed is, President Trump announced,  he’s leading in the polls, and his two assistants raised this issue,” Jordan said. “...That’s why we sent Mr. [Mark] Pomerantz and [Carey] Dunne the letter last night.  That’s why we want to talk to these two individuals and find out what is going on here.”  Jordan has asked for all communications about this case between Bragg and the two attorneys.

By the way, if you want to see some serious TDS, Pomerantz even wrote a book called PEOPLE VS. DONALD TRUMP that likens President Trump to mob boss John Gotti and says Trump “manages to dance between the raindrops of accountability.”  Welcome to the Twilight Zone…

Anyway, Jordan said Congress wants to know about this, because this has federal implications, this has congressional implications, this has national implications ‘cause they’re interfering in the most important election we have, the election for President of the United States.”

When confronted by the GOP committees, who have asked Bragg for all relevant documents and a sit-down transcribed interview, Bragg said they were conducting “an unprecedented inquiry into a pending local prosecution” and that “federal funding is an insufficient basis to justify these unconstitutional requests.”  (We’ll see about that.)  He even bizarrely tried to blame Trump for the situation he’s in, saying Trump had created a “false expectation” that he would be arrested.  That’s pretty amusing --- not to mention wrong, as Trump was responding to a leak to THE NEW YORK TIMES from the DA’s office.

Bragg’s extreme defensiveness suggests what the legal system calls “consciousness of guilt,” and we like the cynical response to it at TWITCHY…

A big question is whether Bragg withheld exculpatory evidence from the grand jury…

We also need to know if the White House played a role.  Here’s an excellent analysis from John Solomon...

With Bragg’s case possibly about to crash and burn, one of the talking points going out now among Democrats is that we need to change focus and, in the words of former White House spokesperson Jen Psaki, “get the spotlight off the Manhattan DA case,” as the other investigations of Trump --- those over alleged election interference in Georgia and classified documents at Mar-A-Lago --- are “so much more serious.”  But we’ve looked at those cases in detail for months, and, really, they seem just as politically motivated as this one and have problems of their own.   Democrats might end up wanting to take the spotlight off those cases, too.  But to them, that only means they have to come up with something else to shine the spotlight on for a while.

Sean Hannity wraps up the week well…




RELATED:  Now let’s look at the opposite situation, a case that hasn’t been brought but should be.  It’s beyond debate now that the Biden family has received millions of dollars from its shady foreign business dealings, including with CCP-tied conglomerates.  There appears to be nothing of value that then-VP Joe Biden’s relatives could have offered in exchange for all that money, except influence with the Big Guy, who is now President of the United States.

We also know that Joe Biden was lying every time he said he had no involvement with his son Hunter’s foreign business affairs.  And now, we even see the improper use of the Vice President’s top staff to defend Hunter Biden from press inquiries after it became known that he was on the board of corrupt Ukrainian energy company Burisma.

This latest discovery is thanks to America First Legal (AFL), which got the pertinent documents after a request to the National Archives.  Hunter business partner Eric Schwerin appears to have been giving marching orders to VP Biden press official Kate Bedingfield, as far back as 2015, even telling her what to say to the press.  Nick Arama at REDSTATE reports that while Joe Biden was saying he had nothing to do with Hunter’s business, Hunter’s partner was in “continuous communication” with his White House staff.

AFL calls it “an unusually close working relationship.”



Thank you for reading my newsletter. 

For more news, visit my website.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

No Comments