February 22, 2019

Excellent article by Conrad Black, summing up over two years' worth of lies, sedition and skullduggery.



Yesterday’s commentary about former FBI General Counsel James Baker’s testimony that he argued with then-FBI Director James Comey about whether Hillary should be indicted on the Espionage Act left us with one huge question –- one I think we have the answer to.

According to Baker, he and his colleagues went round and round for “a period of time” on this issue. Baker was “appalled” and “alarmed” when he saw how deeply classified the materials on Hillary’s server had been, and he thought there was evidence to indict. Keep in mind, Baker was the top attorney at the FBI; his job was to be their resident high-ranking legal expert and resolve issues such as this. His role was to advise Comey, not the other way around. But Comey –- who was not supposed to be deciding for or against prosecution anyway; that was for the attorney general –- had already made up his own mind, producing a report that changed the legal term “grossly negligent” to the softer “extremely careless” (though in fact they mean the same thing) in describing Hillary’s wrongdoings. He and others at the Bureau kept arguing with Baker until he finally changed his mind.

So the big question is: What was it specifically that changed Baker’s mind? Did they finally just wear him down, or was there some particular thing?

Dan Bongino has a lot of understanding of the inner workings of government entities such as the FBI, having been a Secret Service agent. His podcast from Thursday (Episode 927, with the appropriate title of “Justice Is Dead”) addresses this question and fleshes out a scenario we’ve all suspected. First, he makes the point that Comey, being in law enforcement but not a lawyer himself like Baker, is being influenced primarily by political considerations (Hillary as a viable candidate), not legal (Hillary as a lawbreaker). He’s disregarding the opinion of the person who is most qualified to set him straight on the legal aspects of this case.

Next, he poses the question, what were the highly classified documents found on Hillary’s server that sent alarm bells through James Baker? We know from computer records that when Comey was drafting Hillary’s exoneration, he deleted references to emails she had exchanged with President Obama while she was in a foreign country. No wonder he took that out –- the implications were staggering. Her communications with Obama (super-classified stuff) were easily intercepted by a foreign actor. Can you say “appalling”? How about “alarming?”

We know Comey changed the specific reference to Obama to “a senior government official.” A later version removed even that.

We also know that by this time, Obama had already said he was not aware of Hillary’s use of a personal server until he heard it from the media.  In other words, he lied.  (Recall that Obama used to say that about a lot of things.)  Even worse, if Hillary were prosecuted, Obama would have been a witness in the case, even a co-conspirator. The President had been getting classified emails from Hillary from a non-secure, non-government email address.

Now, here is where Bongino’s former role working inside the White House comes in handy: To Obama supporters who say he wouldn’t have necessarily known the address, that it might have just been loaded into his phone, he replies that this explanation is not possible. As Bongino tells it, Obama had a personal Blackberry. A branch of the military, the White House Communications Agency (WHCA), working in conjunction with the Secret Service Technical Security Division and other departments, determines how the President is going to communicate with his Blackberry and any other device. The President is not going to be interfacing with a non-secure device unless it's been pre-approved.

WHCA would have had to pre-approve any email address that could come in on Obama’s Blackberry. Specifically, Hillary’s email address would have had to be approved, or “whitelisted.” The idea that this could have happened without Obama knowing about it defies logic. According to Bongino, no one on the staff would have “whitelisted” a private email address without first getting approval from Obama.

So, here’s what it looks like: Hillary was guilty, guilty, guilty of putting highly classified material at risk by setting up a private server while she was Secretary Of State. In doing so, she violated the Espionage Act.  She did this deliberately, likely to hide documents from Freedom Of Information Act requests, and knew what she had done. The top FBI officials knew it. The top lawyer for the FBI knew it. Hillary’s aides knew it (and also lied about knowing it). Obama knew it. He lied about knowing about it.  And he himself was implicated in the crime.

The magnitude of this was enormous, especially in the summer of 2016, when Obama was still in office and Hillary was running for President. If I had to guess, I’d say this is why Baker changed his mind from “She should be prosecuted,” to “Okay, let’s drop it.”


Commentary continues below advertisement



In a welcome court ruling, a federal judge in Philadelphia dismissed a lawsuit by two boys, ages 7 and 11, backed (some might say “used”) by environmental groups, against President Trump for rolling back Obama-era climate change regulations.  The suit claimed that Trump’s decisions on how to deal with the issue violated their Constitutional due process right to a “life-sustaining climate system” and were responsible for their asthma and allergies (reminder: he’s been in office for only two years.)

The judge ruled that the Constitution does not guarantee what they claim and they can’t prove Trump’s policies caused their health problems, so they don’t have standing to sue (those points, and the sheer absurdity of the suit, would seem obvious to any reasonable jurist, but that didn’t stop a federal judge in Oregon from going along with it.)

The best part of the ruling wasn’t the specifics of why Judge Paul Diamond dismissed it, but his note on a larger issue that applies to all of these “lawfare” suits against Trump (a term coined to describe using nuisance lawsuits as a form of warfare to block the President from exercising his Constitutional powers.)  Diamond wrote:

“Plaintiffs’ disagreement with defendants is a policy debate best left to the political process.  Because I have neither the authority nor the inclination to assume control of the Executive Branch, I will grant defendants’ motion” (to dismiss.)

I propose that those words be carved into stone and hung over the benches of every federal court in America.  And make them three times bigger in the 9th Circuit Court.



Here’s the natural end result of young people attacking history without bothering to learn anything about it first:  In Dunn, North Carolina, vandals poured a flammable liquid on a statue of General Lee and set it on fire.   Fortunately, it sustained only minor damage.  I assume they were too dumb to know that stone doesn’t burn. 

That’s a fairly safe assumption, considering it also wasn’t a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee, but of World War II Gen. William C. Lee.  The two aren’t even known to be related.  And if the idiot vandals think of themselves as “anti-fascists,” trying to torch a statue of one of the planners of the D-Day invasion that led to the defeat of Hitler is a weird way of showing it. 

All these “social justice warriors” managed to prove is that statues aren’t the only things that have heads made of granite.



Democrat presidential hopeful Kamala Harris just ruined the Democrats’ whole political strategy on healthcare, and the implications for 2020 could be huge.

For months, the Democrat Party has been sliding towards a “Medicare for All” single-payer government takeover of the healthcare industry.

Bernie Sanders, who coined the phrase, looks set to jump in the race, and virtually every declared or likely Democrat 2020 candidate — including Senators Elizabeth Warren, Corey Booker, and Kirsten Gillibrand — is at least giving the idea lip-service.

Liberals are convinced the idea will be popular with voters, and supporting government-run healthcare is quickly shaping up to be a litmus test in the Democrat primaries.

They may want to reconsider now that Harris has given Americans their first look at what “Medicare for All” would actually entail.

Commentary continues below advertisement

CNN devoted an entire town hall-style broadcast to its darling of the moment, and Kamala Harris used it to pitch Medicare for All.

"Let's eliminate all of that. Let's move on,” Harris said after describing some of the frustrations people have with the private health insurance market. She’s clever to focus on the flaws in our existing healthcare system, which almost everyone agrees is a confusing and inefficient mess, but she’s got the wrong prescription for treating it. Government meddling in the healthcare industry created the problem, and taking it to the furthest possible extreme is a foolish response.

Her real mistake was being too honest about the details, though. The plan she intends to run on would involve the complete destruction of the private health care industry, kicking more than 170 million Americans off of their current coverage, and putting everyone on a single government-controlled plan.

“Well, listen, the idea is that everyone gets access to medical care, and you don’t have to go through the process of going through an insurance company, having them give you approval, going through the paperwork, all of the delay that may require,” she explained, adding, “Let’s eliminate all of that.”

“Medicare for All” is dazzlingly deceptive messaging, borrowing the name of a broadly popular program to distract from its destructive nature, and until recently the strategy was working — 56 percent of respondents supported the idea in a recent poll, while 42 percent opposed it.

The same poll, however, shows Americans hate everything else about Harris’s plan, which is why she may have blown the Democrats’ whole scheme by revealing the dirty details.

The poll shows that only 37 percent of people want to eliminate private insurance, compared to 58 percent opposed. An even larger majority — 60 percent — oppose raising taxes to pay for Medicare for All’s $32 trillion price tag, something its proponents freely admit will have to happen.

The most damning finding of all for the Democrat candidates hoping to run on Medicare for All in 2020, is that only 37 percent of those surveyed were aware that Medicare for All means they would lose their private coverage. In fact, 55 percent erroneously believed they would get to keep it.

Ambiguity is essential for the Democrats, because if those people were to realize what “Medicare for All” really entails, support for the scheme would evaporate overnight.

One secret Harris didn’t disclose about her Medicare for All plan is that it includes a loophole for the super-rich and well-connected, who would still have access to expensive specialty coverage that ordinary Americans could never afford — as we see in other countries with single-payer systems that don’t explicitly outlaw private insurance.

With everyone but the elites under one government plan, Medicare for All will quickly suffer the same fate as other single-payer healthcare systems: long lines, low quality of care, and no alternatives.

Democrats are making a big gamble with Medicare for All, and they can’t afford to let the American people see behind the curtain of their benign-sounding slogan. Polling shows only 27 percent of Americans would support Medicare for All if it led to greater wait times, and fully 70 percent would oppose it.

Kamala Harris jumped in the 2020 race very early and had the role of introducing the Democrats’ latest health care proposal to the American people. She may have done the job a little too well for her own political good.


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Comments 1-25 of 29

  • Anita Mae Barker

    03/03/2019 09:19 AM

    Hi, Mike............... THe crazies are getting crazier. What will be the end result?

  • Beth Dean

    02/25/2019 10:02 PM

    I voted for Trump , mainly to see abortion stopped and stop my tax dollars fund plan parenthood. While Republican could have done something but did not. Now Look what is happening!!!
    May God intervine Over the weak panty waste in Washington. Days like Noah’s.
    I think I know where satans angles were today Monday February 25 2019 a day that made America Not Great. May God have mercy those who Hate this ruling and show us the way to respond.??

  • Catherine Jones

    02/25/2019 07:10 PM

    I sometimes feel helpless and almost hopeless with what is happening to the Country I love. What I don’t understand why those in our government allow the minority to push their socialist agendas into our Democracy! I truly don’t recognize our Country allowing transgenders and homosexuality changing the way we live, especially that allow males into female bathrooms. I thought our Democracy was decided on passing laws by the majority rules. I believe God is going to say ENOUGH! This being an offense against our Lord!

  • James W Lowder

    02/24/2019 02:58 AM

    On a political sliding scale, I would place Michelle Obama to the left of AOC. No body knows exactly where she stands politically but this I feel is a good guess. Remember, behind every successful man is a pushy nagging wife. Between Barack and Michelle, Barack is the lesser of the two evils. If she were to run, no other female Democrat would have a chance and she would probably beat all the men as well.

  • gary stilwell

    02/23/2019 10:14 PM

    I love this. Here is what should happen---we wait until the subhuman dems get close--by then, all of us should realize the folly of their flawed plan-crush them at the polls--believe it or not-- it will save your life and the lives of your children---

  • Dennis Ray Hower"

    02/23/2019 06:53 PM

    I am surprised that no one is challenging Harris's eligibility to be president. One of the three requirements for the office is that the candidate must be a natural born citizen. While Harris was born in the US, her parents were not citizens of our country. They were living in the US but were citizens of other countries when Kamala was born. There is no question that Kamala, by virtue of her birth in the US, had US citizenship like the many "anchor babies" who are born to non citizens but not natural born citizenship. Her citizenship qualification should be an election issue.

  • Amelia Little

    02/23/2019 03:36 PM

    I saw a meme again today from a young person carrying on how Medicare for All would be so wonderful. As usual, I suggest they talk to the actual citizens (the victims) of single-payer/government health care countries. Ask them about how long it takes to be seen by a doctor (except in extreme situations,) ask them who makes the decision of how to treat your diagnosis--or if you are allowed to treat it. Ask them about things we take for granted as being addressed pretty quickly (perhaps a laparoscopy to determine cause of pain, or an approval for gallbladder removal, etc) Heck, there are things many of us go to a doctor for now that probably doesn't even make the list of what you can be seen for under government health care. (Or, maybe ask a Vet how government health care works for them, right here in the US of A.) Surely, if one of the candidates actually tries to tell people "if you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance" people would recall how that worked with obamacare and keeping your doctor if you like your doctor. And, maybe everyone should be told that not only can the rich still get private insurance, if that person is an elected politician--that YOU, that taxpayer, would be paying really big bucks for their premiums--for medical care you won't be able to dream of having. Oh, and in many places (not all) people currently on medicaid go to the dr (or er or wherever) and get treatment--all at no cost for premiums, co-pay or deductibles. While the no-cost thing might still happen, the level of services is going to drop dramatically even for them. Think on that for a while.

  • rodney burke

    02/23/2019 01:35 PM

    your comment on the 9th circuit is a hallelujiah! The court's job it NOT to regulate the executive. kamala Harris is going to if she keeps it up, cut her own throat and that os the Dems on health care. Government has zero business in health care. They are NOT health care people. they are NOT nurses, physicians, x-ray tech and lab technicians. We need health care people in the health care business. Just like we need health researchers in the drug business and NOT lawyers. Less government and more private sector control works so much better. The failures in government controlled medicine are legend. Russia, Warsaw Pact nations, GB, Canada. Denmark, Sweden and Norway I am not sure about but there is NO place in the world where it works! This is a communist concept; let's be honest, it's not about health care, it's about control. this is diametrically opposed to EVERYthing America was founded on. We MUST call it out, loud and clear. This advocates a totalitarian state, plain and simple. Everything the "government tried to run it screws up. Do we need more proof than our own government? How about Venezuela? Cuba? two close by dismal failures.

  • Tony Weaver

    02/23/2019 12:46 PM

    Question for AOC and other socialists ... Why do you want to take Oprah’s money away from her?

    After all she is a billionaire just like the other billionaires you want to steal from

  • Helen Sustachek

    02/23/2019 12:02 PM

    When, oh when will justice be done for Obama and Hillary? We're tired of waiting.

  • Rusty H. Wright

    02/23/2019 10:39 AM

    Perhaps it's time for "Faithbook" as an antidote to facebook. You and Franklin Graham could reach a lot of folks with the truth.

  • Lu Jean Bedard

    02/23/2019 09:59 AM

    Thank you for all you do to keep us informed about what's going on with our government. If it weren't for you and a few others who inform us about the REAL story, we'd be in serious trouble. Please keep doing it!

  • Joseph Romano

    02/23/2019 09:34 AM

    Governor Huckabee - Re the Hillary email issue, I would just like to ask you whether the intent of continuing to discuss this subject will end with an honest attempt on the DOJ's part to indict all of these players for their crimes or has that time passed because Comey gave her/others a "Get Out of Jail Free" card? If there is no possibility of a resulting indictment and possible conviction, why are we wasting any more time on this subject? Bottom line, can this case be reopened or not? If you or I had done what she and Obama did, you know where we would be today! Thanks.
    Joe Romano
    Smithtown, NY

  • Donna Yates

    02/23/2019 08:46 AM

    If my memory serves me correctly, Obama claimed, "you get to keep your own doctor. All pre-existing conditions will be accepted and your costs will be lower".

    He didn't tell you nor did Pelosi even read through it's over 1000 pages, that the IRS would be running it. It was nothing more than a way to increase your taxes, and that your premiums would sky rocket to double or even tripple after one year.

    He also didn't tell you if you didn't sign up for healthcare you would be charged an additional fee when you filed your taxes. As Pelosi stated, "we have to approve it before we know what's in it". That's like telling all Americans to sign a blank check over to the government and they will fill in the amount for you. You'll be charged a fee if the check bounces.

  • Claudine Hale

    02/23/2019 08:09 AM

    Good morning Mr. Huckabee, Please send this info on Clinton, Obama, etc, to new Attorney General. He really needs to read this himself. You may tell him one reader from Georgia really wants him to read your article.....that NO ONE is above our American laws! We are depending on him to be fair, open, and Constitutional...he is our voice! Thank you. Mrs. C. Hale, Thomasville, Ga

  • Joseph Romano

    02/23/2019 08:07 AM

    Governor Huckabee - Re the Hillary email issue, I would just like to ask you whether the intent of continuing to discuss this subject will end with an honest attempt on the DOJ's part to indict all of these players for their crimes or has that time passed because Comey gave her/others a "Get Out of Jail Free" card? If there is no possibility of a resulting indictment and possible conviction, why are we wasting any more time on this subject? Bottom line, can this case be reopened or not? If you or I had done what she and Obama did, you know where we would be today! Thanks.
    Joe Romano
    Smithtown, NY

  • Dianne Rabkin

    02/23/2019 12:42 AM

    Wow, thank you for staying ahead of things and writing the truth. I can't imagine how hard that is sometimes. God is ever present, keep on going on.

    Blessings my friend.

    Dianne Rabkin

  • Allen M Swatsworth

    02/23/2019 12:25 AM

    Governor Huckabee, I loved your link and the article by Conrad Black. What an excellent summary of what we have lived through for the past three years. I do believe the majority of Americans believed the Ms Clinton did break the law with her private email server. May we hope that the new Attorney General will complete the investigation into this and bring justice back to the USA.

  • Keethlyn Fletcher

    02/22/2019 11:12 PM

    I want to clear something up.
    If I remember correctly, in order to fun for public office you have to be a citizen of the United States and to be a citizen you have to read, write, and understand English, and you must swear allegiance to the United States of America. So, how did the Islamic terrorists get in office?

  • Danna Shirley

    02/22/2019 11:10 PM

    I just watched the Democratic candidates spouting about "reparations." I am the granddaughter (white) of farmers in Arkansas during the depression. Both sets of my grandparents worked the land and my family never owned slaves but they suffered living in the poor and poverty areas of Arkansas just like African-Americans. Where are their reparations?

  • Jerry Korba

    02/22/2019 11:06 PM

    In the past I questioned who votes for people like Harris Booker Watters Pelosi Schumer Fienstein Omar and the rest of that Collection, to me they are just plain and simple Anti Americans representing people who can not read, write, hold a diploma in their hand live above the poverty line use English as a second language. So if I want to be a member of Congress or the Senate I look at the base and figure it out if the voters are poor Socialism everything is free resonates with this voter if the voters are non white the Government is racist if your community is gay, LGBT is your game and so on. I have mentioned that all of the people in America has been put in to groups why? So we can have misfits control certain groups if we didn't have all these different groups we wouldn't have these misfits representing them and gee don't they enhance their voters life? check out that Maxine Watters district see how well she has done. If I were in her position I would beg 45 to come in and build that community not impeach him and one wonders why they call her low IQ. The voters still can't read or write the poor remain poor, black gay guy still likes the idea of rope around his neck Good God y'all what is the Left good for? Nothing say it again NOTHING!!!!!!!! Who needs this garbage? Clean up America rid America of the Lefties Policies and the way they think.
    . United States Of America why can't we be just plain, simple or extraordinary, colorful, hardworking ,,respectful, honest, fun loving Americans? Most of Americans are we need all Americans on board. Get rid of the Left Misfit Leadership and let all Americans thrive.

  • Bill Taylor

    02/22/2019 11:06 PM

    Mike, regarding Hilary’s email address, I think it should be noted that Colin Powell also used a “non-governmental email address”. It was NOT a private server, as Hilary’s was, but that was not your point...right? I would also say that while securing a conviction against Hillary might be ‘fair and just’ it would do nothing to change an election that has already been decided against her and a ‘guilty verdict’ already cemented in the minds of many.

  • Don St. John

    02/22/2019 10:29 PM

    AOC, Harris, Booker, etc. are all fools for revealing anything about anything they propose, your above commentary about Harris is a prime example (Medicare for All). I remember how (and the a fore mentioned individuals should research) how Jimmy Carter got elected. I remember listening to him and remarking to myself, "I have heard him talk and I do not know anything he is for or against". HE GOT ELECTED.

  • Joretta Lynn

    02/22/2019 10:19 PM

    Mike.....i so count on you to keep me informed on the goings on in my Country. I truly do not believe what any media says, which is so sad.......Joretta

  • Sid Levin

    02/22/2019 09:49 PM

    Mike, General Bill Lee is known as the Father of the Airborne!
    It appears that the perpetrators of this stupid act are great products of the
    communist, socialist, leftist public indoctrination centers known to most as
    Public schools and colleges, taught be communists, socialists and leftist imbeciles
    who know NOTHING about our American history. Time to get rid of the so-called diversity bullshit and get back to teaching the Three “R’s”! Bring back shop classes, vocational and apprenticeship programs. Time for high schools to Stop bragging about how many graduates are going on to college (which a great percentage will not last their Freshman year), and start bragging about how many got good paying JOBS!