March 28, 2018


The message you have just received was delivered by Mike Huckabee and includes advertising powered by PowerInbox.  These ads help bring this newsletter to you free of charge. 

Today's Commentary: Stunning Uranium One deal overlaps with other stories -- Media bias on display -- One final idiotic opinion from John Paul Stevens -- Genocide -- Roller coaster ride -- Additional Mike Huckabee commentaries


POLL: Do you support adding a citizenship question to the census? VOTE HERE

If you enjoy the newsletter also, please forward it to a friend and tell them they can subscribe for free at


It’s amazing how much overlap there is in several stories going on right now. For example, while special counsel Robert Mueller’s team continues to investigate alleged but so-far-unsupported ties between the 2016 Trump campaign and “Russia Russia Russia,” Congress is examining alleged and very-much-supported ties between the Clintons and Russia as seen in the unfortunate (for us) Uranium One deal. A key witness in the Uranium One case, an informant named William Douglas Campbell, is represented by the law firm of Joseph diGenova and partner Victoria Toensing, who just made news because of conflicts of interest that kept them from acting as attorneys for President Trump in the Mueller case.

The Uranium One case is pretty complicated, which Democrats are happy about because the harder it is to follow a damaging story, the less likely the public is to follow it, and the less damaging it will be. And this one is damaging not only to the Clintons, whom the Democrats try not to pay much attention to these days, but also to former President Obama, because he never should have signed off on such a sale, in part because it’s GIVING URANIUM TO RUSSIANS, and also because of reports obtained by Campbell of criminal conspiracy on Russia’s part. Obama-worship is alive and well (the idea he suggested of cloning a million Baracks and Michelles might make one think it’s gone to his head a little too much, but I digress), so you can bet anything that damages his legacy will get little media play. That makes Democrats happy, too. Still, we’re smart people out here in flyover country, and it’s not that hard to connect the dots in this important story.


Mike Huckabee

Commentary continues below advertisement


Media bias on display

By Mike Huckabee

One clue that the news media are biased is when you have a major event that gets wall-to-wall live coverage, yet only non-mainstream sources point out the obvious truth about it. It takes several days, if at all, before the public image starts to crumble and media people begin to talk about what was readily apparent to non-biased observers from the get-go.

And so, four days after the big “March For Our Lives” anti-gun rally in Washington, someone at CBS News notices that, for a nonpartisan rally for “common sense gun laws,” there sure was a lot of obscene, violent, partisan, eliminationist rhetoric aimed at Republicans, Trump and NRA members. And maybe it did more harm than good to the gun control movement because the organizers so overplayed their hands that it will spur a backlash in November from millions of law-abiding Americans who don’t like seeing people elected to power who consider them to be child murderers who don’t deserve Constitutional rights.

Please note that I’m not criticizing CBS; I think it’s admirable, even remarkable, that a piece this clear-eyed ever ran at CBS News at all...



One final idiotic opinion from John Paul Stevens

By Mike Huckabee

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens wrote an editorial for the New York Times, claiming that the Second Amendment is outdated and should be repealed. Granted, he’s 97, so I’m going to cut him some slack on his legal acuity. But Glenn Reynolds of the Instapundit blog (himself a law professor) points out just a few of the many problems with that:

It’s nearly impossible to repeal any Constitutional amendment, much less the Second right in the Bill of Rights. Repeal requires broad-based, national majority support. Despite relentless propaganda to the contrary, Second Amendment defenders actually have more support than their opponents do.

If you argue that the Second Amendment must be repealed before you can pass sweeping gun control laws, then you’re tacitly admitting that such laws would be unconstitutional.

The Bill of Rights enumerates natural rights endowed to us by our Creator, not granted to us by government. Politicians can try editing the list, but that would not revoke a God-given right.

Finally, Prof. Reynolds predicts that “nothing would be better for the GOP in 2018 and 2020 races than for the Dems to make this an issue.”

Considering that Stevens was appointed to the SCOTUS by Gerald Ford as a moderate, then drifted leftward until he was considered the most liberal Justice on the Court, ruling with the left on abortion, gay rights, obscenity, gun control and a host of other issues, there’s only one thing surprising about his op-ed: If Reynolds is correct in his prediction, it took Stevens over 40 years, but he’s finally written an opinion that would be good news for conservatives.



By Mike Huckabee

Some states have either passed or are considering bans on abortion solely because a pre-natal test indicates that the baby may have Down syndrome. Of course, these laws are being challenged by pro-choice activists and stayed by federal judges. But as Archbishop Bernardito Auza, Vatican nuncio to the U.N., just told a UN panel, targeting an entire class of human beings for murder in the womb is not merely discrimination, it’s genocide. The Bishop noted a quality of life study by the American Journal of Medical Genetics which found that nearly 99% of people with Down syndrome are happy with their lives.

I’ve met many Down syndrome children and found them to be some of the most loving, inspiring and beautiful children I’ve ever known. I’ve also interviewed some amazingly accomplished Down syndrome adults, some of whom have testified before Congress and asked lawmakers the gut-wrenching question, “Do I not have the right to exist?”

As the Bishop notes, if we allow this kind of wholesale prenatal slaughter of an entire class of people, what moral grounds do we have to protest societies in which boys are more highly prized than girls, so simply being a female baby is justification for abortion? Where do we draw the line? Sadly, for some abortion rights activists, the answer is that there must never be a line drawn at all.


Commentary continues below advertisement


Roller coaster ride

By Mike Huckabee

Last week, when the Dow lost over 700 points on one day and 400 the next, largely over fears of a trade war with China over President Trump’ new tariffs, I warned you that following stocks on a daily basis was like riding a roller coaster: it can make you feel dizzy and sick, but it’s better to ride it out than to try to jump off in the middle, when you’re near the bottom.

Well, it’s looking now as if all the bluster over a trade war (which neither side wants) was just posturing, the tariff threats might be just a negotiating tactic in the art of the deal, and now, the US and China are likely to sit down and hammer out some new trade terms. Result: on Monday, the Dow roared back by 669 points, the third-largest point gain in history. So I hope you didn’t bail out and sell on Friday.

If you just don’t have the stomach for the roller coaster, I have two suggestions: put your money into a safe, solid mutual fund and don’t look at the daily numbers, trusting that your investment will increase over time. Or just invest in bonds. That’s government debt, so you know it’s more like the carousel: it’ll just keep going around and around in circles forever and never disappear.


Additional Commentaries

Tucker finally had enough of David Hogg and took him down on national TV.

A good guy with a gun

I don't envy Republicans come Election Day

Did you miss reading a newsletter recently?  Go to our archive here.

Commentary continues below advertisement

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Comments 1-1 of 1

  • Amelia Little

    03/28/2018 11:39 AM

    As far back as at least 30 years ago, mother (at least one of advanced maternal age) was offered and sometimes encouraged to have amniocentesis to detect birth defects, mainly Down Syndrome. When I declined, there was no pressure, but the doctor made sure I had pamphlets to educate me. Even back then, there were already women who had the choice and many took advantage of testing to detect defects that their other child(ren) were born with, or there was a history in the families of defects. CF was one. Not that I am promoting abortion, but pointing out all this is nothing new. I guess it wasn't important last year or throughout 30+ years ago?