Blessings on you and your family, and from all the Huckabee staff! Today's newsletter includes:
- Did you see 2,000 MULES this weekend?
- Sussmann's attorneys plan to "put Trump on trial"
- And much more.
1. DAILY BIBLE VERSE
For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.
If you have a favorite Bible Verse you want to see in one of our newsletters, please email [email protected]
2. Did you see 2,000 MULES this weekend?
The new Dinesh D’Souza documentary film on the 2020 election, 2,000 MULES, premiered online this weekend. As you know, it was made in collaboration with an organization called True the Vote, which has done a monumental amount of research on the stuffing of unsupervised ballot boxes in battleground states. His movie lays out their findings.
It opens with an orderly in-person election scenario --- the way Election Day is supposed to be --- with a lofty voiceover from Ronald Reagan. The contrast between this and what comes later in the film is dismaying. Whether or not it can be conclusively proved the 2020 election was rigged, we’ve got a BIG problem with our elections.
The film transports us back in time to Election Night, with stories from puzzled reporters of vote counts being stopped in the middle of the night and, the next morning, battleground states that had been solidly in Trump’s column being miraculously flipped for Biden, by razor-thin margins. Afterwards, reporters with their marching orders repeat the same mantra over and over: “The 2020 presidential election was the cleanest, the safest and most secure election ever in American history!” (Sorry, but whenever someone says that, I'm reminded of the line from THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE, “Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.”) Anyone who questions this is supposedly perpetuating “the Big Lie.”
This movie shows how geopositioning technology was used by True the Vote to track the movements of ballot-box stuffers and –- most compelling –- how security cameras clearly show the (alleged) stuffing itself, done with gloves that were peeled off after each drop-off and placed in nearby trash cans. Traffickers photograph the ballots before dropping them in, presumably so they can get paid later.
But you don’t have to be a tech wizard to understand what went on. D’Souza includes a roundtable discussion with Larry Elder, Sebastian Gorka, Eric Metaxas, Charlie Kirk and Dennis Prager, who announced at the outset that he’s “agnostic on this question.” Others, such as Metaxas, professed to be extremely skeptical of how the election turned out and believed most of America is, too. (Polls bear that out.) It just never made sense to them that a weak candidate who campaigned from his basement and had so little enthusiasm from his party got more votes than Barack Obama did. But all they had seen so far were, as Kirk put it, “crumbs,” nothing cohesive.
“If I thought the President were a Nazi, I might steal the election,” Gorka said. And people on the left definitely had been brainwashed to think Trump was one. Still, as Gorka pointed out, Trump had built more support from the black and Hispanic communities than any Republican President since the 1960s. And Biden STILL got more votes overall; how does that happen?
Larry Elder also brought up the media suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story, which, as we all know, was de facto election interference. “That alone altered the election,” he said. But, of course, that story would need a documentary of its own.
They agreed that the people who say we have to “move on” are those in the elite who think Trump was an anomaly. Hugh Hewitt insisted, “Show me the proof and I WILL speak up, but I’ve not gone on board with ‘I know this was a fraud.’”
But then the evidence is presented, and it’s compelling. Just see the film; so much is visual. And afterwards, take a look at Politifact’s laughable “fact”-check of the 2,000 MULES trailer. It’s just what you’d expect from those Poynter Institute propagandists.
Their headline says the premise of the trailer is ‘faulty.’ But it goes on to refute that premise by stating a faulty premise of its own, that the 2020 election, with its widespread use of mail-in voting and lax security laws (thanks to Marc Elias), was the most secure in history. They must've heard that from some CNN reporter.
“Many states have laws allowing people to return completed mail ballots on behalf of others, such as family members,” Politico states. “Ballot drop boxes are more secure than standard mail boxes.” But returning a ballot on behalf of a family member is not what this documentary is about AT ALL. And, as one can see from the video, a drop box being tamper-proof has nothing to do with the legitimacy of the ballots being dropped into it. No one is there to ask, “Is this your ballot? Is this the ballot of a family member? Do you have...seven...registered voters in your household? Why are you here at 3AM? And, uh, why are you wearing surgical gloves and carrying a camera?”
“The 2020 presidential election was secure and evidence from state and federal officials and courts shows no indication of widespread fraud,” Politico states. (Again, I'm reminded of “Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest warmest...”) Actually, this is incorrect. Recall that courts refused to look at evidence, citing it as “moot,” or even to grant standing to sue. And in Wisconsin, to cite just one example, an investigation is currently underway into organized illegal vote harvesting in nursing homes, statewide.
“Experts say the evidence D’Souza points to is inherently flawed,” according to Politico. But they do not adequately explain how it's flawed. Then they go on to smear D’Souza personally, as if that disproved the allegations made here.
They accuse D’Souza of using an out-of-context quote from Biden to make it seem as though he was admitting election fraud. I know that quote, and interpreted its inclusion as just a touch of humor and irony; does anyone think from it that Biden was actually admitting election fraud? I’m not sure even Biden’s shriveled brain would come up with that.
Anyway, the “fact”-check goes on, but there is nothing in it that discredits what True the Vote has put together.
One “expert” they talked with, a political scientist from the University of Florida, was doubtful because if there were such a scheme, it likely would have come to light by now. That’s no reason not to take seriously the evidence that IS coming out now.
Another political scientist –- are these really the “experts” on interpreting cellphone data? –- from the University of Wisconsin-Madison accuses True the Vote of “conspiracist” thinking. “They are interpreting data that confirms their pre-existing conclusions.” Does he not realize that’s exactly what Politifact is doing?
But D’Souza and True theVote are just getting started. They have much more. Their documentary didn’t name any names or give addresses, but they say they’re “pulling the ripcord” very soon and releasing all their evidence, including the identities of over 2,000 ballot-trafficking mules and the addresses of all the ballot stash houses they located. They’re putting it all online.
And D'Souza has responded to Politifact's "fact"-check.
The Associated Press also did a "fact"-check on 2,000 MULES; this one was laugh-out-loud funny, specifically in its lame attempt to explain away the gloves being worn. We were going to fact-check the AP "fact"-check as well, but someone beat us to it, and this one is magnificent.
3. Sussmann's attorneys plan to "put Trump on trial"
There’s just one week to go before the Michael Sussmann trial starts in federal court. Last week, we discussed the material that Special Counsel John Durham wanted to include but that the defense was working to exclude. U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled on that last Friday; Nick Arama at RedState has a good summary.
He sees Durham as being limited by this in some respects but still able to get most of his big-picture evidence in. On the downside, this judge doesn’t want to bring in evidence of the “joint venture” among Sussmann, Joffe and the Clinton campaign to smear Trump with the Alfa Bank story, because Sussmann hasn’t been charged with conspiracy. The judge said he doesn’t want to “confuse the jury” and “distract from the issues at hand.”
On the upside, evidence of the charged offense (the lie about working on behalf of Hillary’s campaign and Rodney Joffe) and also of Sussmann’s motive will be allowed in. That includes “evidence of Mr. Sussmann’s client work.” Joffe hasn’t been granted immunity and will have to testify, though this means the prosecution will have to steer clear of whether his actions were “objectionable or illegal,” and also any questions about the accuracy of his data.
But in another development, just as Sussmann’s attorneys, from the Democrat-connected firm Latham and Watkins, are trying to keep Durham’s evidence out, they’ve got their own “evidence” that they want the judge to let in. And what they want to use it for is essentially to put President Trump on trial for colluding with Russia. I am not kidding.
Think of it: they’re in federal court with a Washington DC jury that is probably very biased against Trump. They want to make this case not about their client but about...Evil Orange Man...and his Russia affiliations. For that, they have “evidence” they want to bring in, including a series of over 20 news articles about Trump and Russia that appeared between mid-May and mid-August of 2016.
News flash: articles such as these are not evidence of anything. Or, in Durham’s more lawyerly way of putting it, they have “no evidentiary or factual basis.” Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if Sussmann had planted some of those stories himself. That was part of the “circular reporting” strategy used by Clinton’s henchmen and even the FBI to advance the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory. It’s even part of how the FBI got their warrant to spy on Trump’s campaign, right along with the phony Steele “dossier.” Hey, how about reading excerpts from THAT to the jury?
As Cleveland describes it, “...the media coverage Sussmann seeks to present to the jury is a tour de force of the press pushing the Russia collusion hoax.” One of the articles she mentions quotes Hillary campaign manager Robby Mook, who generally gets credit for launching the whole fake Trump-Russia story. He did this live on the CNN convention floor, to distract from the breaking story about the DNC sabotaging Bernie Sanders’ campaign. These fairy tales are supposed to be evidence...of what?
But Sussmann’s attorneys want to include them to show that their client had genuine concerns that the Alfa Bank story was real. They think that if they can get a DC jury to believe he felt this way, the jury will let him off for lying. Unbelievable.
Cleveland says that even if the judge excludes this “evidence” as prejudicial, Sussmann can still make the argument on the stand, saying that he “approached the FBI out of a genuine concern for our national security.” Oh, brother. But if he shovels it on thick, a Trump-hating jury might just cut him a break.
4. Roe-related violence on the Left
As if common sense and experience couldn’t tell you that CNN would get any story involving conservative views horribly wrong, the network’s claim that Capitol Police were bracing for violence by rightwing extremists over the looming SCOTUS Roe v. Wade decision was especially jaw-dropping, It would've been hilarious if the consequences weren’t so serious.
CNN, as usual, had the story completely backwards, and as anyone who isn’t blinded by partisanship could have predicted, the violence over the weekend came from pro-abortion, leftwing extremist groups. Nobody in his right mind thought that authorities were putting up fencing around the Supreme Court for fear that pro-life activists might storm the building. That’s just part of the Democrats’ fizzling narrative that out of all the riots of the past two years, the single one by people on the right in the Capitol on January 6, 2021, was the one establishing a dangerous pattern, and not the dozens of deadly riots by the left that have caused billions of dollars in damages -- and that are now flaring up again, thanks to the possibility that the Court might finally hold the Roe decision up to Constitutional scrutiny.
Here’s what the “mostly peaceful” pro-abortion leftists did over the weekend while all those dangerous rightwingers were attending church and celebrating Mother’s Day:
They defaced churches with pro-abortion graffiti and disrupted services with profane, blasphemous, threatening and obscene demonstrations, chants and signs (warning, content is for adults with strong stomachs):
(At least in Virginia, Attorney General Jason Miyares warned that he will come down hard on anyone who tries to interfere with the “fundamental and natural right of all Virginians to practice their religion in peace.)
They also tried to bully Supreme Court Justices into changing their rulings by protesting outside their private homes. They eventually learned that this is a crime in Virginia when police cars showed up, and then they suddenly thought of something else they had to do (also warning: foul language. Such charming and persuasive folks!)
An on-the-scene Daily Signal reporter said the protest at Justice Kavanaugh’s house was an “attempt at intimidation” and one of the scariest things he’d ever witnessed.
Then there were the ones who really showed their true colors by fire-bombing the office of pro-life non-profit Wisconsin Family Action in Madison. The exterior was also spray-painted with the Antifa symbol, a code term for “ACAB (All Cops Are B*****ds”), and the threat, “If abortions aren’t safe then you aren’t either.”
This was so bad that even President Biden’s spokesperson Jen Psaki stopped pussyfooting around about “peaceful protest” and issued a statement strongly condemning “violence, threats and vandalism.”
So memo to CNN, and Attorney General Merrick Garland: This is what “domestic terrorists” look like. Not people who criticize the Administration on Facebook, or complain about what their kids are being taught at school board meetings, or who think you should have to show ID before voting. It’s the people threatening Supreme Court Justices, assaulting churches, throwing Molotov cocktails and threatening the lives of those who disagree with them. I realize this is a difficult nuance for you to comprehend, but do try to discern the difference.
Maybe I should also CC that memo about what an actual “domestic terrorist” is to the FBI. Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee report that FBI whistleblowers tell them the agency is trying to fire employees who attended the pro-Trump rally in Washington on January 6, 2021.
To be crystal clear: These employees are not accused of committing any crime. They didn’t take part in the riot. They didn’t even enter the Capitol. They just exercised their First Amendment right to attend a rally and hear what the President had to say. For this, they’re allegedly having their security clearances revoked, which the majority of FBI employees are required to hold to keep their jobs.
The heads of these agencies who are turning them from once-respected impartial law enforcement agencies into political goon squads should be aware that purges can go in two directions. I’m counting the minutes until January 20, 2025, when I hope and pray that a new Republican Administration, backed by a Republican Congress, will march most of the leaders of these agencies to the nearest exit, forcing them to leave behind all their computers and papers for a thorough audit and investigation, perhaps to be followed by indictments. Then return them to their original nonpartisan roles and let the sunlight in for some heavy disinfecting.
5. Roberts looks for a compromise on Roe
There’s a report by the Washington Post that Chief Justice John Roberts, who has become famous for being the Court’s swinging door, tried (and may still be trying) to persuade conservative Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett to side with him on a compromise. It would uphold the 15-week Mississippi abortion law, but not overturn Roe v. Wade.
According to anonymous conservative “sources,” Roberts failed on that but is still trying to convince someone to flip to a compromise that would keep Roe but remove the viability standard (Roe only legalized abortion up to mid-pregnancy.) But as Bonchie at Redstate.com points out, without the viability standard, there’s nothing enforceable left to Roe, so what’s the point of upholding a gutted, meaningless ruling conservatives believe is unconstitutional?
Roberts’ waffling, if true, would hardly be surprising, but the most important aspect of the story is this: while the leaked ruling is from February 10th and has likely been altered and amended since then, apparently, the five-vote majority to overturn Roe must be intact or Roberts wouldn’t still be trying to convince someone to “compromise” – something that’s now even less likely, since it would be seen as caving to mob threats and intimidation. So the loudest bullies might just be shooting themselves in the foot.
6. Victory Day
Today is Victory Day, a major Russian holiday marking the end of World War II. It’s also usually an occasion for Russia’s military to parade its fearsome arsenal of weapons. But that’s a little curtailed this year because so many of them are either attacking Ukraine or blown to pieces. That didn’t stop Vladimir Putin from giving a speech that sounded as if it were faxed in from Bizarro World.
The man now widely reviled for attacking a neighboring nation unprovoked, slaughtering civilians, destroying entire cities and threatening nuclear retaliation to anyone who tries to stop him claimed that it's the US and other Western nations that support threats of nuclear war against Russia. He said they had "tried to attack our historical territories like the Crimea.” (Putin invaded and annexed the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in 2014.) He said, "The enemies of our country have tried to use international terrorism against us." But "Russia has always stood up for an international system of equality. We have always tried to find compromise solutions.”
Is your head swimming yet? As an example of Putin’s belief in compromise, equality and opposing terrorism, while he was emitting that hot gas, rescuers in Bilohorivka, Ukraine, were searching for any survivors in the rubble of a school building that was sheltering civilians and that was flattened by Russian bombs on Saturday.
To wash Putin’s jaw-dropping lies out of your brain, here’s a story about how the G7 leaders marked May 8th, VE Day (Victory in Europe Day), the 77th anniversary of Nazi Germany’s surrender in 1945.
And as a reminder of what VE Day really meant and the heroes who saved the world from the Nazis, here is a gallery of great photos of the celebrations of the very first VE Day.
And for those who don’t know about the war, the heroes, the sacrifice and the victory of the Allies, here’s some background to get you started:
7. Look who agrees with us:
You know what I think of the Biden Administration’s attempt to create a DHS branch of “disinformation” police headed by what appears to be a mentally-unstable, leftist theater major. But here are a couple of wildly diverse voices that apparently agree with me about this assault on freedom of speech and the open marketplace of ideas: comedian Rob Schneider and President John F. Kennedy.
I Just Wanted to Say
Thank you for reading my newsletter.