BY MIKE HUCKABEE
Blessings on you and your family from all the Huckabee staff! Thank you for subscribing and I hope you enjoy today’s newsletter.
DAILY BIBLE VERSE
13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
The Nord Stream story
My writers and I spent much of yesterday emailing back and forth, debating whether we should report on the claim that the Biden Administration was behind the sabotage of Russia’s undersea Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines last September. We are very cautious about reporting things that aren’t solidly sourced.
This story came from Seymour Hersh, a New York Times investigative reporter who has won a Pulitzer Prize. Both those things used to be impressive credentials, but these days, you could say the same things about the woman who made up “The 1619 Project.” On top of that, Hersh didn’t report it in the Times but on his independent Substack page, and it’s based on one anonymous source that he claims has “direct knowledge” of US Navy operations. Plus, both the White House and the CIA have denied the story (again, for what that’s worth these days.)
Okay, now that we’ve laid down a disclaimer longer than the safety warning on a baby's car seat, here’s Hersh’s story.
He claims that as Russian troops were massing on Ukraine’s border, and with Germany hesitant to support helping Ukraine because it was dependent on Russian energy, “President Joseph Biden saw the pipelines as a vehicle for Vladimir Putin to weaponize natural gas for his political and territorial ambitions.” So a team of US Navy divers used the NATO training exercise BALTOPS 22 as cover to plant remote-controlled explosive devices on the pipelines that were detonated three months later.
Hersh claims Biden’s decision came after nine months of “highly-secret back-and-forth,” and the issue “was not whether to do the mission, but how to get it done with no overt clue as to who was responsible.” If it could be traced back to the US, it would violate US promises to minimize direct conflict with Russia. There would be “dire political consequences” because it would be seen as an act of war by Russia and also of sabotage of our ally Germany’s energy supply just as a harsh winter was approaching. So this is what Biden himself would call “a big (bleeping) deal.”
But is it true? The pipeline ruptures have remained a mystery until now. Earthquakes were ruled out. Russia was accused of sabotaging their own pipelines, which makes little sense because they could have just shut them off at the source. So far, the most convincing parts of the story are the claim that the CIA was dumbfounded when Biden blurted out during a news conference months before, “If Russia invades…there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it,” giving away the super-secret plan. That I could see happening. Also, Biden does have a history of destroying pipelines no matter what the consequences.
For now, however, file this explosive claim under “Major bombshell, IF TRUE,” and just consider yourself informed of it until more information comes down the pipeline.
I am saddened and shocked to report that early Wednesday morning, exactly one week after Sayreville, New Jersey, Republican City Councilwoman Eunice Dwumfour was shot to death in her car, another Republican New Jersey council member was shot to death in his car. This time, the victim was Russell Heller, 51, a councilman in the small borough of Milford. A suspect in the shooting was later found dead in his car of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
No motives are yet known in either slaying, nor are there yet any known connections. Is it becoming a deadly job to be a Republican office holder in New Jersey, or were these separate incidents with no political connections? This is a breaking story, so until we know more, please remember the victims and their families in your prayers.
State of the Union Follow-up
Americans generally react positively to State of the Union Addresses (and why not? It’s when Presidents get to stand up in front of Congress and tell us everything we want to hear, whether they mean any of it or not.) CNN always conducts a post-speech poll and it found that 72% of Americans reacted positively to Biden’s speech.
But before he takes that as a sign to announce that he’s running, or shuffling, for reelection, there’s a caveat: every third-year SOTU since this poll began has garnered a positive reaction, most of them higher than Biden's. Obama and George W. Bush were both rated 84% positive. Trump’s got a 76% positive rating, even after years of relentless media assaults. And the breakdown of Biden’s rating was 38% “somewhat positive” and only 34% “very positive.” That’s the lowest “very positive” rating since Bill Clinton’s speech in the middle of a sex scandal, and it’s down from 41% for Biden’s last SOTU.
At least the speech did offer some entertainment value. Social media is reacting very positively to clips of the alternately bored and astonished facial expressions of various Republicans as they listened to Biden ramble on for 72 minutes, and they’re going viral. In this case, those Representatives truly were representing all Americans.
House Oversight Committee questions ex-Twitter executives with amnesia
I do wish our elected representatives on both the left and right would use their oversight power just for fact-finding and not for grandstanding. Yes, the right does it, too, and there was some of that going on during yesterday’s hearing of the new GOP-led House Oversight Committee, as they examined the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story. But judging from the intensity of the Democrats’ fuming, Republicans are definitely over the target. Here’s Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez:
“The NEW YORK POST has this ‘alleged’ information and was trying to publish it without any corroboration, without any backup information. They were trying to publish it to Twitter. Twitter did not let them. And now, they’re upset,” ranted AOC, who understands freedom of speech as well as she does economics. “...A whole hearing. About a 24-hour hiccup in a right-wing political operation. That is why we are here right now. And it’s just --- a--- a --- an abuse of public resources, an abuse of public time...We could be talking about abortion rights, civil rights, voting rights, but instead, but instead we’re talking about Hunter Biden’s half-fake laptop story!”
You know who COULD have provided corroboration? The FBI. Committee chair James Comer of Kentucky, through the questioning of several ex-Twitter employees, showed that they never tried to confirm or debunk Miranda Devine’s story (which was true on all counts). They never spoke with Hunter’s attorney. As Jesse Watters said on FOX NEWS Wednesday evening, “Twitter didn’t ask because Twitter didn’t want to know.”
AOC was wrong on several counts. First, and most importantly, when the POST story broke, the FBI had known for over a year that the laptop was real. (Real, not “half-real.”) There was no question about this. In fact, through ‘incidental’ monitoring of communications Hunter had had with Chinese associates under surveillance, they’d known about his shady business dealings there even before they had the laptop! Yet they kept it all secret until well after the 2020 election, likely changing the outcome. Even during President Trump’s first impeachment, during which the contents of the laptop would have been exculpatory for Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy, the laptop and its contents were still hidden away.
If anyone thinks that looking into something this egregious is an abuse of public resources and time, please explain why. We want to hear it.
Also, AOC needs to explain what she means by the laptop story being “half-fake.” Which half is fake: the debauched, drugs-and-prostitutes part or the take-the-Chinese-money-and-give-dad-10-percent part? Nothing in this outrageous story has been shown to be fake. Only the label of “Russian disinformation” placed on it was fake. Particular aspects of it, like the “10-percent-for-the-big-guy” part, might soon be confirmed with just a little cooperation from Biden-appointed Treasury officials.
And is the concern that we’ve sold out to China really less important to AOC than abortion rights? AOC might be happy to know that if China gained control here, women could have abortions to their hearts’ content. (I use that phraseology because of the lapel pins some Democrats were wearing during Biden’s address Tuesday night: “Abortion [heart].”) Of course, that’s unless the regime decided it was time for women to HAVE more children --- then abortion would be outlawed. That’s how it works in a totalitarian state. Anyone disagreeing with the whims of their government could be tossed into prison for decades (ha, no pregnancy!) and/or be forced to make athletic shoes or cookware.
Well, I’m on the verge of a rant myself, but you get the problem with what AOC and her Democrat colleagues think about these hearings and the priorities they represent.
(Also, did you notice how the only way to get Democrats to care about wasting the taxpayers’ money and time on investigations is for power to change hands so it’s them being investigated? None of them cared about the House ignoring inflation, illegal immigration, crime or any other issue of top importance to the public as they yammered away on January 6th for two years.)
As for censorship of the laptop story, the FBI --- which, again, KNEW the laptop was real --- installed one of their own, former FBI general counsel James Baker, as Twitter’s deputy general counsel. Baker was one of the witnesses called to testify on Wednesday but managed to weasel out of giving definitive answers. “To the best of my recollection” is how he prefaced his denials. Rest assured: a top attorney such as James Baker remembers EVERYTHING HE HAS EVER SAID OR HEARD, word for word, inflection for inflection. But, gee, under questioning, Baker couldn’t even remember if he’d talked with the FBI about the Hunter story, and you’d think such an important conversation, or lack thereof, would’ve stuck in his mind. As John Houseman said in THE PAPER CHASE, Baker has learned “to think like a lawyer.”
Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan said he thought “the scary part” of this story was that people at Twitter “got played by the FBI.” He was being too charitable. Twitter played ALONG. With the exceptions of a few situations here and there in which Yoel Roth expressed concern, Twitter seemed to be entirely on board.
Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley, in an interview with Jesse Watters, noted that later the same day as the NEW YORK POST story broke, Twitter was on a conference call with the FBI, and it was AFTER that call that Twitter decided they had to censor the story. What did the FBI tell them, or not tell them? And how much nudging and winking was going on?
As for AOC, Hawley said she’d have to have been “living in a cave for the last year” not to know the laptop was all-real. Even Hunter, through his attorney, acknowledged it --- before the attorney thought “uh-oh” and backtracked.
An extremely angry Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert questioned the four ex-Twitter execs. If she was giving them the what-for, it might have something to do with the fact that she herself was shadow-banned, apparently by the very people sitting before her. But she did say she wasn’t angry for herself, but “for the millions of Americans who were silenced…”
Here’s the video. See if you think the impassioned name-calling and rapid-fire questioning is effective, or if Congress should just focus on getting answers right now.
Jordan is also chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and he’s working in tandem to get to the bottom of the ‘Justice’ Department’s role in censoring social media platforms. He wrote a letter to Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton last Wednesday to ask for all documents generated by the Missouri v. Biden lawsuit. That’s the suit brought by the attorneys general for Missouri and Louisiana whose discovery phase has already revealed a great deal, on par with the “Twitter Files” for what has come out.
As reported by JUST THE NEWS, Jordan wrote that “the materials unveiled by the [Louisiana AG] Landry suit served to validate claims that the government consciously worked with social media companies to suppress contrary viewpoints.” He’s given them until February 22 to produce these materials.
Jordan has also issued subpoenas to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Christopher Wray. So, who’s going to enforce these subpoenas? Merrick Garland?
The Judiciary Committee has also heard the testimony from a recently retired FBI supervisory intelligence analyst named George Hill, who told them the FBI had pressured the Boston field office to open cases on 140 people who had simply taken bus rides to the January 6 rally in Washington DC. To their credit, they saw no evidence of criminality and wouldn’t do it. The Washington DC field office didn’t like that, but the Boston office stood firm, he said.
His testimony raises concerns about the FBI accessing personal bank records without warrants and the possibility that they won’t release video from the rally because it might show undercover agents and human sources. Much more detail in this must-read report.
By the way, as reported by NBC NEWS, Hunter’s legal team (ah, he has a “team” now, not just Abbe Lowell) has sent letters to Rudy Giuliani, John Paul Mac Isaac, Tony Bobulinski, Roger Stone, Steve Bannon and 9 others --- the full list was not provided to NBC --- asking them to preserve evidence for future lawsuits related to the alleged theft of personal data that may include information from his laptop. All these people will, of course, have to hire attorneys.
“His” laptop? We thought Hunter had taken that admission back and was now being coy about it again. At any rate, they’re putting on what looks like a big bluff. Hunter Biden left that laptop for more than 90 days at the shop owned by John Paul Mac Isaac, forfeiting any legal claim to it.
The letters are written to be intimidating. They all start the same way: “You have made various statements and engaged in certain activities by your own admission, or that have been publicly reported in the media, concerning our client, Robert Hunter Biden (‘Mr. Biden.”’) This letter (‘Notice’) constitutes notice that a litigation hold should be in effect for the preservation and retention of all records and documents related to Mr. Biden.” The time frame goes back all the way to 2008.
Roger Stone has been legally persecuted so much already, he wasn’t fazed. What are they going to do, raid his house again? He tweeted: “No EVIDENCE to preserve. Everything I know about Hunter Biden’s laptop I read in the @NYPost.”
Finally, no one deserves the last word on this more than Miranda Devine…
The Fight Over Education in Virginia continues
I wrote recently about half the Democrats in the House refusing to vote to condemn socialism, even after assuring us that, of course, they’re not socialists, why what nonsense, perish the thought! Well, except for those like AOC who actually call themselves “Democratic Socialists,” but trust them, that’s, like, totally different, LOL. Yet somehow, the evidence that they can’t help defending socialism and attacking traditional American values just keeps piling up.
Like the Senate Democrats in Virginia who just voted on party lines to reject the nomination to the Virginia Board of Education of Gov. Youngkin’s nominee, Suparna Dutta. Youngkin said they shockingly claimed she isn’t qualified, even though "She is a mother and advocate for parents’ rights, she is an (Indian) immigrant and an advocate for Asian American rights, she is an engineer and advocate for STEM in education." But most un-qualifyingly, she dared to speak up during a board meeting to say that socialism is incompatible with democracy, and that "It co-opts the important decisions belonging to families and individuals."
This apparently horrified some of the other board members, including Democrat Senator Tim Kaine’s wife, Anne Holton, who sparked Dutta’s comment by saying she was “uncomfortable” with proposed school standards that say the "Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are remarkable documents" and that socialism and communism are "incompatible with democracy and individual freedoms." She insisted, "You cannot reference the Declaration of Independence and Constitution as remarkable documents without also acknowledging that they contain fundamental flaws of enshrining slavery and limiting the protections that they provided for only to white, propertied men,” and that "plenty of governments" call themselves socialist democratic governments. Given a choice, guess which one I'd say is unqualified to be on the Board of Education?
Democrats branded Dutta as a “far-right extremist” (their new term for anyone to the right of Rob Reiner) and claimed she said some politically-incorrect things that she denies. But their banning of Dutta from having a place on the Board of Education while Holton remains should send a signal to parents everywhere, and especially in Virginia, that you can’t just vote out the local school board and expect schools to stop being anti-American indoctrination camps. You have to look higher to weed out the problem. Like with the Senators who oversee the state Board of Education.
Effort to silence Project Veritas' Pfizer video grows
Corporate media have done an excellent job of censoring and dismissing the Project Veritas undercover video of an allegedly Pfizer executive admitting that the company is mutating the COVID virus, it’s not under strict regulations because people leave the FDA to work at Pfizer, and that he’s worried about what the mRNA vaccine may be doing to women’s fertility. Even with tens of millions of views online, most media outlets have brought down the Cone of Silence, and other outlets have attempted to debunk the video, even though it appears to be the unedited comments of Pfizer's own employee.
Now, the latest development: Pfizer put out an internal memo to its employees, warning them to beware of revealing any confidential company info to strangers, acquaintances or even friends or family members.
A few interesting points:
The memo does not specifically refute the allegations in the first video, and it seems to confirm that the person in it works for Pfizer (“We are aware of and managing a recent report where one of our colleagues was baited into conversation…”)
Without naming Project Veritas, it refers to them in the most derogatory terms, as “anti-science activists” who “manipulate information, fueling the spread of baseless claims and endangering public health.” Why am I reminded of Dr. Fauci claiming that anyone who questioned him was attacking science? Some might say they are “actual journalists” who “exposed information that should cause serious concerns about public health.” That's what they called it back when shows like "60 Minutes" practiced actual journalism.
Most hilarious of all: The memo warning employees not to leak any information to groups like Project Veritas was leaked to Project Veritas, which promptly released it to the public. Are they now going to claim that PV misleadingly edited the memo? Somehow, the fact that a giant pharmaceutical company has that much trouble silencing its own employees makes me feel safer.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY:
Thank you for reading my newsletter.
For more news, visit my website.