|February 5, 2021|
Blessings on you and your family, and from all the Huckabee staff!
Today's newsletter includes:
- Bible Verse Of The Day
- NO THIRD PARTY: Here's why
- Why is Sen. Leahy presiding, not Chief Justice Roberts?
- Day The Music Died
- New Podcast
- Make America America Again
BIBLE VERSE OF THE DAY
NO THIRD PARTY: Here's why
By Mike Huckabee
After I said that if we formed a third party we’d never, ever win another presidential election, EVER, I received quite a few letters from readers who think differently. Here’s a typical one...
From Stephen R:
You say that you’re against a third party and that we’d never again win an election if that happens. I totally disagree! If we abandon the Republican Party in major numbers with the right candidate, I think we’d stand a better chance rather than having the same old s*** on the menu!
What chance will the Republicans have when most of us are totally fed up with the crap that we’ve listened to for years and nothing changing (excluding President Trump)! The rest of them are just filling a seat and going along with the Democrat BS! They talk a good line when in front of the cameras, but go along with the Dems behind closed doors and to hell with their constituents! What good will the Republican Party be when 2/3 of us will not vote for another Republican candidate? I’ll vote Democrat just to remove these spineless cowards that are in office trying to say that they have our backs!!! I’m done!!!!
From the Gov:
Thanks for writing, Stephen. Obviously, our party has reached a crossroads, and it’s critically important how we decide to go forward from this point. But if I may offer some “famous last words,” I can think of none more appropriate than what you just said: “I’ll vote Democrat just to remove these spineless cowards...”
Vote Democrat? With all due respect, Stephen, I have six words for you:
Are you out of your mind?
The reason we have such a disaster in the U.S. Senate now is that Georgia Republicans, fed up by the Nov. 3 outcome, refused to vote Republican, staying home on the day of the senatorial run-off elections and giving their state two of the most radical left-wing senators ever to be on the ballot, and that’s saying something. We know now that if they had come out for the Republican candidates in numbers comparable to their November 3 turnout, they would have kept the Senate out of the hands of radical leftists. Gosh, I hope all those fed-up conservative Georgia voters are happy now.
Let’s do some basic math. Right now, the two major parties, in terms of numbers, are pretty evenly split. If the 2/3 of Republicans who, as you say, are thoroughly fed up and refuse to vote for another Republican DO vote for a third party candidate instead, that will give the third party candidate a whopping 2/3 of what the anti-Democrat vote would have been otherwise. The Republican gets the other 1/3. These two parties will split about half the total vote.
But the Democrats get almost all of the other half, which means they WIN, as all they need is a plurality. Obviously, 1/3 of the Republican vote isn’t going to get us squat. But even 2/3 of that vote isn’t going to get us squat, either. One thing about Democrats: they do stick together. And if they stick together and we fragment, with no more than 2/3 of our vote going to any one candidate, guess which party wins?
That’s right, the Democrats, every time. Go to the head of the class.
When Democrat Party candidate Bill Clinton won in 1992, he got a whopping 43 percent of the popular vote. The other two major candidates, Republican incumbent George H. W. Bush and Independent Party candidate and Texas billionaire H. Ross Perot, essentially split the rest; that “giant sucking sound” you heard was Perot sucking up 19 percent of the vote (the most a third party candidate has ever received, but it translated into ZERO electoral votes). So victory went to Clinton, the Democrat. Some analysts said that Clinton would’ve beaten Bush anyway, but we don’t know about that. A huge number of conservative Republicans rejected a second Bush term and voted for Perot, giving us the Democrats.
Let’s go farther back in history, to when former President Teddy Roosevelt tried a comeback with a third party, the Bull Moose Party. In 1912, a group of Republicans dissatisfied with President William Howard Taft formed the Bull Moose Party specifically for TR to run again. (He supposedly had said he was “fit as a bull moose” to run again.) The Bull Moose Party was “progressive” for the time and favored such new-fangled ideas as women’s suffrage, direct election of U.S. senators, and various social reforms. Roosevelt ran on what he called the “Square Deal,” based on fair business competition and more welfare programs for the needy.
Anyway, his candidacy divided the Republican Party, and Democrat Woodrow Wilson easily won. Would you like to hear about Woodrow Wilson and his administration? That’s a topic for another day, but for now let’s just say it would have been much better if TR hadn’t divided the Republican Party and let Wilson and his pals glide into the Oval Office.
Things the left would love to see from us:
1) An uprising. In fact, the Capitol breach played into their hands so well that if it hadn’t happened, they would have had to create it; make of that statement what you will. The Capitol incident gave the left all the excuse they needed to label every one of us a “domestic terrorist” and start taking our rights away. As frustrated as you might be, DO NOT give them any more reason to do that. Believe me, they are just waiting for this.
2) A third party. The left would LOVE this. Aside from the reasons mentioned above, a third party is not going to have the “ground game” of the well-oiled machine that is the Democrat Party. All this will do is split the Republican Party vote and ensure Democrat victories time after time. I know many of you don’t want to hear this, but it’s the hard truth.
3) Giving up. Some conservatives are now saying the fight is over and we have lost. Why bother voting if the elections are rigged? Why bother tweeting if you’ll just be banned? Just stay home and wait for the end. But this would be a gift to the left. When you give up, they push even harder.
We have to fix our party, from the inside. We do have a few outstanding incumbents, but for the RINOS, we have to find solid, articulate conservative candidates for primary challenges. That’s what the “progressives” in the Democrat Party did, through organizations such as Justice Democrats, the group that recruited AOC. Democrats organize like mad, and if they aren’t satisfied with their incumbents, they challenge them. This is what we’re going to have to do with our own who fail to represent our views and values. Perhaps Trump could help with this. We must go into every race with the strongest ticket we can find, work like our freedom depends on it (because it does) and be assertive poll watchers!
But, again, the worst thing conservatives can do is split off and form a third party. Don’t even think about it!
Why is Sen. Leahy presiding, not Chief Justice Roberts?
By Mike Huckabee
Bro Mike, you say: "since the Constitution says “the Chief Justice SHALL preside...” Chief Justice John Roberts has wisely chosen not to accept this dubious honor and will play no part in the "trial," so Sen. Leahy has graciously taken it upon himself." How is it that Justice Roberts can "choose" to not perform his constitutionally required duty? And how is it that Leahy can "take it upon himself"? (asking for a friend)
From the Gov:
When President Trump went through his first impeachment trial in the Senate, Chief Justice Roberts presided, just as the Constitution calls for during the impeachment trial of a President. For the second (sigh) trial that takes place next week, the Chief Justice sent his regrets, but neither he nor the Supreme Court offered any comments.
Donald Trump is now a private citizen; he does not hold the office of President and so cannot be removed from it. So the ceremonial duty of presiding as outlined in the Constitution apparently does not apply to the Chief Justice in this case.
Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, who serves as president pro tempore of the Senate, will preside instead. In a statement, he said, “The president pro tempore has historically presided over Senate impeachment trials of non-presidents.” What he didn’t say is that those “non-presidents” were other office-holders, not private citizens as Trump now is. Vice President Kamala Harris could have presided as well, but as she is so closely in line for the Presidency that it would have looked even more inappropriate than what we are going to see.
As I've said, Democrats are essentially making this up as they go along. Some have argued that the Chief Justice owes us an explanation for his decision not to preside, as analyst Dan McLaughlin does here in an article we linked to a couple of weeks ago.
There also remains the question of whether a former President can be impeached at all. Legal expert Andrew McCarthy has said, “History and precedent are on the side of those who argue that impeachment trials of non-incumbents are constitutional,” –- this is news to me, and he doesn’t cite the precedent –- “but that is beside the point. The Supreme Court surely wants no part of this hot political dispute, and the Constitution’s commitment to impeachment trials to Senate control gives the justices a good reason to stay out of it.”
As McCarthy said, “Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one; there is no entitlement to the kind of due process required in judicial proceedings, where a presumptively impartial judge and counsel for the parties to select a jury of the defendant’s peers, which has been vetted to ensure its objectivity.”
In other words, this will be a political circus. Sen. Leahy has already said he’s voting to convict, before the thing even starts. With him presiding instead of Chief Justice Roberts, it will seem even more like the show trial it is. If the Democrats have any self-awareness at all, which is doubtful, maybe they’ll try to keep it a little more low-key this time around, to avoid looking like the partisan ghouls they are.
Yes, ghouls. If you don’t think this is going to be a hateful and contentious process, take a look at the wording of Impeachment Manager Jamie Raskin’s letter to Trump “inviting” him to testify --- which he wisely will not be doing.
Day The Music Died
By Mike Huckabee
Since Wednesday was the anniversary of “The Day the Music Died” (when Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens and the Big Bopper died in a plane crash in Clear Lake, Iowa), I thought it would be good to share my recent interview with Don McLean about the 50th anniversary of his classic song inspired by that tragedy…
And here he is, performing “American Pie” live on “Huckabee” on TBN…
By Mike Huckabee
This week on The People’s Podcast, Governor Huckabee talks to energy advocate Daniel Turner, who shares the plight of pipeline workers who lost their livelihoods with the stroke of a pen in Biden’s Oval Office. In exclusive interviews with laid off workers at the end of the Keystone XL Pipeline in Corrigan Texas, we hear firsthand about the human toll of President Biden’s war on oil and radical climate agenda. But first, Governor Huckabee gives a history lesson on President Biden’s radical evolution on the issue of abortion.
Make America America Again
By Mike Huckabee
I keep reminding conservatives who are either so despondent over the newly-empowered left’s war on conservatives that they want to give up, or so angry that they want to form a third party and keep leftists in power forever, that they are not so powerless as they think.
Remember that Republicans control far more states and state offices than Democrats, whose power is largely concentrated in big, blue (failing) cities. And I’ve urged you to prepare for phase two of Make America Great Again in 2022 (“MAAA” or “Make America America Again”) by volunteering to help with elections, donating to electable conservative candidates, organizing on the grassroots level and putting pressure on your state and local officials to clean up the election integrity laws that the left has been trying to erase for years.
(Incidentally, if you want us to believe that you’re not trying to pull off election fraud, maybe stop fighting all efforts to ensure that elections are honest – like the racist claim that voter ID laws are racist because black people have a hard time obtaining an ID. Numerous polls in recent years have shown strong support for voter ID laws, including up to 80% of Americans and even majorities of blacks and Democrats.)
So take heart that some states are already pushing back. Yesterday, I told you of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ plan to take on big tech companies that censor political speech on the state level.
Add that to the huge multi-state antitrust lawsuit that’s already under way against Google.
And now, three cheers for the North Dakota House Republicans who have introduced a bill requiring the state Attorney General to review any Presidential executive order that’s not affirmed by a Congressional vote. The law would bar the state, its political subdivisions, and any publicly funded organization from implementing any executive order that restricts a person’s rights or that the AG determines to be unconstitutional. I’d say that covers about 40 of the 40 executive orders Biden has issued so far. The bill has a good chance of passing since the North Dakota legislature is heavily Republican.
As I pointed out recently, Republicans have complete control of the governments in 24 states, so I’d call North Dakota’s bill “a good start.”
I’m sure the same leftists who just spent four years telling us that “resistance” to President Trump's policies was patriotic and heroic will call resisting their policies treasonous. But if you check out that link, it’s noted that the concept of states refusing to implement unlawful federal orders was endorsed by James Madison in Federalist #46 and has Supreme Court precedents dating back to 1842.
To quote one of their heroes, Saul Alinsky, and his “Rules For Radicals,” rule #4 is “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” So do to them exactly what they did to Trump: resist executive orders that you think are unconstitutional. Only unlike them, do it peacefully, through the courts and state and local governments. We also have the advantage of their orders actually being unconstitutional.
In fact, it might be a good idea to take a look at all of those rules in the left’s playbook and see which ones could be turned against them. I’m kind of fond of #5 myself. And they make it so easy!