Latest News

January 10, 2022


Good morning! 

Blessings on you and your family, and from all the Huckabee staff!  

Today's newsletter includes:

  • Bible Verse of the Day - Psalm 112:7
  • Jan. 6 coverage that is worth reading
  • The Soulless Left
  • Judge dismisses multi-state lawsuit against the Biden Administration
  • Fact-checking the "fact-checker" who fact-checked Senator Tom Cotton (say that three times fast)
  • America The Beautiful
  • Note to whoever is making charts and graphs for the White House Twitter account
  • "Half and half"
  • Tweet of the Day
  • Grisly story
  • Top News: More aftermath: competing narratives of January 6


Mike Huckabee


He shall not be afraid of evil tidings: his heart is fixed, trusting in the Lord.

Psalm 112:7


2. Jan. 6 coverage that is worth reading:

From the one media outlet whose reporting on January 6th is worth reading, the Babylon Bee:

3. The Soulless Left:

It was reported that a couple of the attorneys arguing in the Supreme Court against the OSHA vaccine mandate have tested positive for COVID. This set off the expected gleeful responses from the left.

Personally, I don’t understand how anyone would be so soulless as to wish death and disease on someone just for disagreeing with their politics. It’s ironic that they think this proves their moral superiority when celebrating someone’s illness or death actually proves the opposite.

In this case, their sense of superiority is even more misplaced, since it’s reported that at least one of the attorneys who tested positive is fully vaxxed and boosted. So calling attention to him catching COVID anyway seems to undermine the argument for vaccine mandates. But I guess people who take to Twitter to celebrate other people getting sick aren’t famous for thinking things through very deeply.

4. Judge dismisses multi-state lawsuit against the Biden Administration:

Here’s something to think about as you’re pumping that $4-a-gallon gas that President Biden blames on greedy oil companies. A judge just dismissed a multi-state lawsuit against the Administration for canceling the Keystone XL Pipeline project on his first day in office. The reason: TC Energy, the Canadian company that had the contract to build the pipeline, announced that they considered the project dead, so the judge said the case was moot.

And why is it dead, along with America’s hard-won energy independence? Here’s a hint: it’s not because oil companies are greedy.

5. Fact-checking the "fact-checker" who fact-checked Senator Tom Cotton (say that three times fast):

This is an interesting and overdue article about Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, and how he is routinely attacked and mocked by the media as a rightwing nut, only to have whatever he said proven to be correct.

He was assailed for suggesting that COVID could have escaped from the Wuhan virus lab, and he was savaged for suggesting that federal troops should be deployed to help police deal with rioters (the media later cheered such troops being deployed in DC after January 6th.)

In the most recent case, Washington Post “fact-checker” Glenn Kessler gave Cotton “Four Pinocchios” for claiming that the Democrats’ COVID relief bill would give checks to convicted criminals and terrorists like the Boston Marathon bomber. He introduced an amendment to prevent that, which the Dems rejected. And last week, we learned that the Boston Marathon bomber did, indeed, get a $1400 check from the taxpayers.

Incredibly, Kessler refused to retract the article, instead only revising it to “One Pinocchio,” claiming that Cotton’s claim “lacked context.” No, it was 100% correct. He read the bill, he warned what it would do, and he tried to no avail to stop it. Sen. Cotton had the facts, which has now been proven, and the “fact-checker” was wrong. Cotton’s office is demanding a full retraction, but perhaps they don’t understand that WaPo “fact-checks” aren’t about facts, they’re about making conservatives look bad.

And that’s what’s known as “context!”

Related: before we get too far into the new year, here’s a look back at seven of the most humiliating instances of the liberal media getting their facts completely wrong in 2021. Yes, I’m thinking the same thing you are: “Only seven?”

6. Note to whoever is making charts and graphs for the White House Twitter account:

When the government finally stops forcing businesses to close and lets people come back to work, that’s not “creating new jobs.” Judging by the comments, you guys are the only ones who don’t know this.

7. "Half and half"

Yet another question that conservatives have been asking for nearly two years (and getting kicked off of social media for daring to bring it up) is “How many ‘COVID hospitalizations’ are actually due to COVID, and how many are just people who are there for other things but happened to test positive?” For some reason, we’re only now allowed to know the answer. And in New York, that answer is “about half and half.”

8. Tweet of the Day:

From the Federalist’s Sean Davis:


9.  Grisly story:

Warning, this story is grisly. But it just might be the most creative excuse any criminal ever came up with. His attorney claims he didn’t murder anyone, he’s simply an unlucky car thief who stole a truck that by sheer coincidence just happened to be carrying the dismembered body of someone he knew, stored in several coolers. Don’t you hate it when that happens?

America The Beautiful

God's creation is all around us. To learn more about Olympic National Park, visit its website here.

10. Top News: More aftermath: competing narratives of January 6

The Democrats gave it their all on the anniversary of January 6, and then, from somewhere deep within their bowels, found even more to keep their narrative going over the weekend.

This was in service to their push to federalize elections with what we call the “Legalize Voter Fraud Bill.” Even before that day, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was setting the stage by saying January 6 was “a symptom of a broader illness, an effort to delegitimize our election process.”

Schumer was lying. As wrong as it was to resort to violence on that day, it was not an effort to delegitimize our election process. It was the opposite: a reaction to what people saw as an attempt by the LEFT to delegitimize our election process, and the refusal even to look at problems with the vote.

But Schumer was lying in service to his goal: passing unconstitutional election legislation. “...The Senate must advance systemic democracy reforms to repair our republic or else the events of that day will not be an aberration --- they will be the new norm.” They have to pass this bill “to save our democracy.” Schumer's even set January 17, Martin Luther King Day, as the deadline for Republicans to work with them to keep them from considering “changes to Senate rules” (ending filibusters) to get the bill passed. All to “protect the foundation of our democracy: free and fair elections.”

Attempts by Republicans at the state level to safeguard the vote against cheating have been recast by Schumer as voter suppression. That’s another lie. If any protection against cheating is going to be characterized as voter suppression, that means there can be no protection against cheating. See how that works?

On Sunday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went on CBS’s “Face the Nation” to offer another version of the same lie: “What the Republicans are doing across the country is really a legislative continuation of what they did on January 6, which is to undermine our democracy, to undermine the integrity of our elections...”

Never mind that Trump’s rally was FOR election integrity, protesting the staunch refusal to examine what appeared to be highly suspicious activity. THEY were protesting the undermining of democracy. And unless Pelosi’s brain is even foggier that we think, she is well aware of that.

Pelosi then said something much more applicable to her party than to the GOP: “They [the GOP] are not only suppressing the vote, they are nullifying elections, saying, ‘Well, it doesn’t matter who gets more votes; it matters who the three people we appoint to analyze that, what they decide.’” Doesn’t that sound like what DNC superlawyer Marc Elias wants to do to keep duly-elected Republican members of Congress from being seated? He wants to go to judges to disqualify GOP candidates from serving in office if they’ve offered any support or approval to Trump and/or his rally, saying that violates their oath of office. (!)

One of those duly-elected congressmen, of course, is Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, one of Pelosi’s “rejects” for her Jan. 6 committee. Jordan has written a letter to the chairman, Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, after the committee asked him to provide information about his communications with Trump. He essentially told them to pound sand.

The committee wants to talk to Jordan “in detail” about every communication he had with Trump on January 6. He said he talked with the President all the time, so it wouldn’t be unusual for them to talk that day. “This request is far outside the bounds of legitimate inquiry,” Jordan wrote, "violates core constitutional principles, and would further erode legislative norms.”

The committee is supposed to investigate only as it pertains to “legislative purposes.” Jordan made it clear: “As you well know, I have no relevant information that would assist the Select Committee in advancing any legitimate legislative purpose.”

Even the committee itself is illegitimate, with no ranking GOP member. Liz Cheney of Wyoming has actually claimed to be the ranking member, which is untrue. As Mollie Hemingway tweeted on the 6th: “Holy crap! Liz Cheney just falsely claimed she is the ranking member --- the top representative of the GOP caucus --- on the J6 committee. In fact, she was hand-selected by Nancy Pelosi and is NOT the ranking member. Huge, huge legal implications associated with this lie.”

Democrat Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina lied, too, going on FOX News Sunday to say it was appropriate to tie the election bill to the events of January 6 because elected officials swore an oath to protect the Constitution from any “domestic terrorists among us.” NO ONE has been charged with domestic terrorism, let alone convicted. He’s trying to imply that anyone who opposes their bill is pro-domestic terrorism. But if Democrats are so all-fired set on protecting the Constitution, why are they pushing a bill that is so clearly unconstitutional?

Kamala Harris, in her speech Thursday, beat the same tinny drum, saying that “the American spirit is being tested” and that “we must pass the voting rights bills that are now before the Senate” on order to “secure and strengthen our democracy.”

Then the Vice President went on PBS for a softball interview with Judy Woodruff. Political hack Woodruff played her role well, praising Liz Cheney for holding Trump fully responsible for the riot and suggesting that Trump should face criminal prosecution.

Okay, here's a palate cleanser: The Epoch Times, in a premium story, offers an analysis of the competing January 6 narratives, saying it “...Depends on Who Tells the Story.”

So, why were Trump supporters at the Capitol that day? To make their voices heard? Register their concerns about voter fraud and inaccuracy? Or overthrow the government? It depends on who wants to know and the answer they want to hear.

But the excellent point this piece makes is that it’s TRUMP SUPPORTERS, in particular those who were caught up in the Capitol breach and are still suffering the consequences, who are in the best position to answer that. Former Pennsylvania legislator and retired Air Force officer Rick Saccone, who with his wife rode a bus to the rally and never even knew there had been violence until he was headed home, says it was mostly just senior citizens peacefully demonstrating. He thinks the ones who actually got violent were not true Trump supporters.

Jake Lang of Sullivan County, New York, has been a (yes) political prisoner held without bail since January 13, 2021, and he has his own story to tell. He’s charged with assaulting a police officer, but he says he was trying to save a woman named Roseanne Boyland, who later died. His father says he’s grown thin in jail, with a scraggly beard that’s now down to his chest.

Boyland is the woman who it was said had died of a drug overdose. Now that video has emerged, there’s serious question about that.

Anyway, if we’re going to have competing narratives about January 6, how about looking at the one told by people who were actually involved, rather than by those who twist the truth in pursuit of a political agenda?

11. I Just Wanted to Say:

Thank you for reading the Morning Edition.

For more news, visit my website here.

More Stories

Evening Edition: Your Tax Dollars At Work