December 20, 2019

Today's Edition



The Nancy Pelosi we saw Wednesday was the Sad Nancy: covered in funereal black as if to pronounce an official period of (fake) mourning. She dressed to convey a deep, profound (profoundly fake) sadness brought on by the (fake) notion that Congress had been given “no choice” but to shamelessly lie, manufacture evidence, ignore due process and twist the procedural rules to impeach the President of the United States. Nancy’s hair and make-up were camera-perfect for this important day, the mascara no doubt waterproof to stand up to crocodile tears. This, not the day she marched with gavel in hand to celebrate passage of Obamacare, would be the day she would go down in history for, and she had to look appropriately somber and serious.

But the Pelosi we saw the following day was the Glad Nancy: decked out like a fire engine in eye-popping Christmas red, celebrating the culmination of literally years of work to impeach the President. She had done what was required of her by the far-leftists running her party and thus would surely keep her job as Speaker, at least until the Republicans take back the House in a landslide in 2020. (Yes, after all this insanity I do think that will happen.) Most actual periods of mourning last at least a few months; this one lasted less than 24 hours.

With gratitude,

Mike Huckabee

Commentary continues below advertisement



Repeating "fake news"

By Mike Huckabee

One thing that my research staff and I are scrupulous about is not repeating “fake news.” One “tell” that sets off our radar is when an alleged quote seems to perfectly reflect exactly what someone’s opponents think of him. That's just too perfect.  If politicians told you what they were really thinking, they wouldn’t be politicians. For instance, just imagine Nancy Pelosi dropping her “I’m so sad I have no choice but to impeach the President (whom I pray for daily), but I just revere the Constitution so much” act and being honest. I know, bad example: nobody can imagine Nancy Pelosi being honest.

I see this all the time in liberal media. Many of the most repeated quotes used to slam President Trump, from “very fine people among the neo-Nazis” to “all Mexicans are criminals,” are deliberately bogus misquotations that have been repeated until they’re holy writ on the left. They fervently believe, and are very passionately upset about, things that simply aren’t true. That’s why I don’t want to see that happen on the right.

That brings us to this story: It’s being widely repeated that Democratic House Majority Whip James Clyburn said about Trump’s Senate impeachment trial, “Let’s give him a fair trial and hang him.” That would be especially shocking, considering Clyburn is African-American. In fact, he did say those words in that order, but it’s lifted completely out of context.

What he actually told CNN is that if the Senate knows they’ll exonerate Trump before even holding a trial, it would be the equivalent of “Let’s give him a fair trial and hang him,” only the opposite. You can certainly argue that House members have no business telling the Senate how to define a “fair” trial, or that there’s no reason for a trial when you’re presented with “evidence” that’s obviously biased, unconvincing and unsullied by facts (that would actually be the equivalent of a judge dismissing a case for lack of evidence or prosecutorial misconduct.) As the linked article notes, it’s also ironic that what Clyburn described (“Let’s give Trump a fair trial and then hang him”) is exactly the attitude displayed by House Democrats over the past month or so.

Still, he did not say that Trump should get a fair trial and then be hanged. The Democrats are saying plenty of crazy and outrageous things for real these days; our side don’t need to make up any more.

I hope that any liberals who read this will note the space I devoted to correcting a misleading, out-of-context quote from the other side. Now, it’s your turn. Better get cracking; you have an awful lot of correctin’ to do.



Commentary continues below advertisement


##Appellation##, I wanted to make sure you also read these comments:

I’ve already written about how House Democrats hoped to stain Trump with the word “Impeached,” but only succeeded in blowing up the dye pack in their own faces and marking themselves as so radically partisan, immature and unserious that they aren’t worthy of holding their offices. Many commentators have also referenced appropriate quotes, such as “When you strike at a king, you must kill him” (Ralph Waldo Emerson) and “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine” (Obi Wan Kenobi.) Well, there’s already evidence that they strike at Trump is only making him stronger.

While the Democrats were beclowning themselves on live TV, Trump supporters were rallying to his side, joined by a lot of new people who hadn’t been paying attention until now, and are apparently outraged by the unfairness shown to the President (and by seeing just what an overstuffed clown car the Democrats have become.)

Just since the impeachment circus began, Trump’s campaign has received a stunning $5 million in donations. As the Dems were leaping to conclusions in their kangaroo court, the Republican National Committee raked in over $20 million in November alone, giving them $63.2 million cash on hand, the most since just before the 2012 election. The DNC hasn’t reported its November numbers yet, but in October, they had just $8.7 million cash on hand and $7 million in debt.

Also, remember all those polls claiming that Trump would lose to every Democrat if the election were held today?  Well,the Democrats should've tried to get the election held before they started their "impeachment" push because ever since, Trump has been surging.  In the latest You Gov/Economist "electability" poll (asking voters who they expect to win), as of today, he's now leading Biden by 6 points,Sanders by 26, Warren by 30 and Buttigieg by 41.

Investors also shrugged off "impeachment," with US markets hitting another all-time high the very next day, on the assumption that the Democrats' mighty blow against the evil Trump is a "non-event."

At this rate, the Trump campaign might have to think of a really nice Christmas gift to send Nancy Pelosi. Considering the state of her home district, how about a designer hazmat suit?



Two brief observations on Thursday's Democratic Presidential Debate:

There was a proposal that the government should pay to move people who have beachfront homes away from (thus far undetectable) rising tides due to climate change.  Haven’t the taxpayers given enough money to Barack Obama and Al Gore already?

In three long hours, the most memorable line said by anyone was a tweet from the Trump War Room, warning PBS
viewers that the debate might be listed on their TV guides as an episode of “Antiques Roadshow.”




Bible Verse of the Day (KJV)

"And at midnight Paul and Silas prayed, and sang praises unto God: and the prisoners heard them."

- Acts 16:25

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


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Comments 1-6 of 6

  • Paul Gleason

    12/20/2019 10:37 PM

    Gov, have you read the CT editorial? Any response you wish to share with us?

  • Amelia Little

    12/20/2019 08:14 PM

    Well, how about the government move all houses in CA, WY, CO out of the usual paths of wildfire. Or move homes out of tornado alley. And, don't forget to move homes out of hurricane areas. If they're going to help one group (that climate hoaxers claim are victims of climate change) they should have to help ALL groups, right? Adds to the nanny state.

    An interesting article in the Blaze that starts out. "Liberal Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said senators need to be impartial in carrying out their role as the "jury" in the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.
    Ginsburg, 86, was asked during a BBC interview about Republican senators who have already said they will vote to acquit Trump, before the trial has even started." I noticed that the BBC interviewer Razia Iqbal did not seem to ask about Democrat Senators who have already voiced THEIR decision on the issue. But, Justice Ginsberg kept it all above board, pretty much saying the "judge" and the "jurors" should keep an open mind during the proceedings. (paraphrased.) I'm just not sure WHO in this world would think that the Senators of either party would have no biases. Am not sure exactly which of the GOP Senators Razia Iqbal refers to, but I'm pretty sure ocasio has her mind made up. I guess, I have heard that GOP Sen Susan Collins has indicated she would vote for impeachment. Is that bias? She allegedly made that statement prior to the final days of hearings.

  • Cliff Newman

    12/20/2019 01:36 PM

    Enough talk about this anti America hate filled left thinking fool.

  • Jerry

    12/20/2019 12:39 PM

    Pelosi U may be able to fool the crack heads and the Liberal educated voters you represent your handlers must be as doped up as U are have they ever taped you to see how U appear on TV? Professional wrestling is more authentic looking than U R. What does she care all they have to do is fool the crack heads and the semi educated. While her voters watch and load up on drugs they chant keep the government handouts coming and keep the borders open I need my drugs cheap they chant either raise my handout allotments or I will steal more and commit more crime Pelosi U R a beauty. Pelosi U R a California product along with Schiff Watters Swalwell Gavin that pretty much says it all Mismanaged Mislead and Oh so Dillusional I guess that's why people are leaving the State of California maybe your handlers could sober up and let U know what a loser U R. They will stay with you till the money runs out what a comfort that must be.

  • Robert Everett

    12/20/2019 12:19 PM

    Remember Newt Gingrich - 'Contract With America' campaign - - 63 Million people voted Trump into office, mayhaps a similar mass mailing, a
    '$4 for 4 More' campaign [63*$4, $254 million] to bring in $$$ for the RNC to ensure all republicans running in 2020 are overwhelming funded.

    $20 for 2020 . . .

  • Darrell Williams

    12/20/2019 12:10 PM

    I understand that the House democrats are being sued by the AoA (a**-holes of America). Seems that the AoA is concerned that the House Dems are giving them bad name