Today's Edition

 

--------------------------

A while back, we examined Hillary’s participation on the Watergate committee in 1974, when she was a 26-year-old recent law school grad, and the proposals she made --- thankfully shot down by the Judiciary Committee --- to control the process for impeaching Nixon. Now that the full House of Representatives has voted, along partisan lines, to approve rules for Schiff’s “impeachment inquiry,” which still has not been formally initiated, we can see that when it comes to denying a political enemy due process, Hillary (at least then) was an amateur.

Since those days, the Democrats have refined their skills and expanded their tactics. As I’ve said, they do not care about preserving concepts such as due process and executive privilege. With glistening eyes, they brandish the Constitution while knowing deep in their hearts that they would secretly use it for toilet paper if that got them what they want at the expense of their political enemies. They worship one thing, and that is power. We now see, very clearly, that the “whistleblower” complaint that kicked off Schiff’s secret “inquiry” was a set-up from the start. And it’s not an impeachment at this point, just a way for Schiff to pick and choose what he wants to release to try to shape a narrative that calls for one.

So, what are the “rules” that just got approved by the Democrats (no Republicans voted for this garbage), and how does this process differ from that followed by the Judiciary Committee during the Clinton inquiry? To start with, we don’t have the Judiciary Committee looking into it; we have numerous other committees instead. Here are a few more examples...

Schiff has the authorization to make transcripts public, BUT HE IS NOT REQUIRED TO.

He must prepare a report for the Judiciary Committee, BUT HE GETS TO SAY WHAT GOES IN IT.

Other committees are authorized to hand over “records” and “materials” to the Judiciary Committee, BUT THEY DON’T HAVE TO.

READ MORE AND COMMENT HERE>>>

With gratitude,

Mike Huckabee


Commentary continues below advertisement


--------------------------------

FEATURED STORY

Medicare for All

By Mike Huckabee

Since Elizabeth Warren has been as slippery as an eel in a vat of Vasoline about how much her “Medicare For All” plan would cost and who would pay higher taxes to cover it (other than “the rich”), I wrote yesterday about a new study by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Government that estimated what it would take to pay for it.

As a reminder, some of the various options included a 32% payroll tax, a 25% income surtax, a 42% VAT (value-added tax) or more than doubling all individual and corporate income tax rates. 

But now, Sen. Warren has finally put a price tag on her plan, even if she’s still being evasive about who would pay it. Her estimated cost (which I think we can safely assume is a lowball estimate) is $52 trillion over the first 10 years.  

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/warrens-52t-medicare-for-all-plan-revealed-campaign-still-claims-no-middle-class-tax-hikes-needed

But her campaign claims this would all be paid for by trillions of dollars in new taxes on “employers, financial transactions, the ultra-wealthy, large corporations and more,” so it wouldn’t raise taxes on the middle class “by one penny.” Except that hitting employers with massive new taxes would destroy so many jobs that a lot of people might no longer be middle class.  Her campaign claims it wouldn't be that hard for employers because they'd no longer have to pay for private health care for employees.  So in case you were wondering, it’s official: “Medicare For All” means “all, whether you want it or not, and if you want to keep your employer-provided care; tough noogies, you’ll be forced onto a government health care program.” 

It’s really cute how Sen. Warren and her eager beaver “progressive” campaign staff, none of whom have ever run a business, think they’re smart enough to remake the entire economy without causing any problems.  Warren concedes another study that estimates her plan would kill 2 million jobs, but calls that “part of the cost issue.”  If you’re one of those 2 million newly unemployed, the elimination of your job isn't a cost issue, it’s a catastrophe.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/warren-agrees-medicare-for-all-could-result-in-two-million-jobs-lost-part-of-the-cost-issue

I know she teaches “economics” in Ivy League universities, but here’s a lesson in Real World Econ 101: you can’t tax employers without it costing employees because all costs of employing someone are deducted from the total of whatever the job is worth.  Every government mandate your employer has to cover to keep you on staff is money that might have gone to you, since they start with what your job is worth and give you what’s left over after paying all the other expenses of keeping you on.  So you might not get the bill for “Medicare For All” directly, but the cost absolutely will come out of your paycheck before you ever even see it. 

Until leftists find a way to pass a bill repealing fiscal reality, there will be no such thing as a $52 trillion government program that doesn’t cost middle class workers a penny. Whenever you hear that promise, I suggest you watch this movie clip:

https://youtu.be/vtBwoinDS18

 

-------------


Commentary continues below advertisement


-----------------------

I wanted to make sure you also read these comments:

Friday morning, the Bureau of Labor Statistics stunned economists with a monthly economic report showing that 128,000 jobs were created in October, despite negative pressure from the GM strike.  Economists predicted only 85,000 jobs. The BLS also revised the previous month’s jobs number up sharply, from 136,000 to 180,000.

https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/huge-october-payrolls-beat-128k-jobs-added-black-unemployment-rate-hits-all-time-low

The overall unemployment rate edged up slightly, to 3.6% from a 50-year low of 3.5%, but the black unemployment rate dropped to a new all-time low.  Average hourly earnings were up 3% from one year prior, and the labor participation rate rose to 63.3%.  In all, it shows the economy is still going strong, even stronger than expected. Kleenex might even have to hire more people to make tissues to handle all the crying from Democrats who were hoping for a recession. 

But sure, let’s impeach the guy who’s responsible for this because a bunch of people who’ve always hated him didn’t like what he said on a phone call most of them didn’t even hear.  Makes sense to me!

----------------------------

 

Whopper of the Day:  Thursday, Nancy Pelosi tried to put a veneer of respectability on her leftist colleagues’ coup attempt by standing beside an American flag (that I kept expecting to burst into flames) and making one of her trademarked hushed, sanctimonious speeches in which she said this:

"Nobody, I doubt anybody in this place, or anybody that you know, comes to Congress to take the oath of office, comes to Congress to impeach the President of the United States…”

https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/103119

What this tells me is that either she’s brazenly lying or she never looked at the platforms of some of the Democrats elected in 2018, who literally ran on “Impeach Trump!”  As a reminder, Rashida Tlaib infamously celebrated her victory by declaring in front of her young son, “We’re going to impeach the m-----f--er!”

If the current crop of Democrats aren’t in office for no other reason than to try to impeach the President on any phony grounds they can gin up, then please give me a list of all the other important things they’ve accomplished for America since taking power. 

I don’t have all day to wait, so she can just text me if she thinks of one.   

 

Bible Verse of the Day (KJV)

"Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost."

- Romans 15:13 - KJV

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!
Captcha

More Stories

Comments 1-5 of 5

  • Amelia Little

    11/08/2019 08:09 PM

    I think pelosi also forgets that during election campaigns, she frequently rooted for democrats to take the House so they could ensure the President be impeached. SHE is part of the THEY--the democrats in the House. I think I even remember a mention about how this would come about when she would pick that gavel back up as Speaker of the House. She is so full of it. Maybe she thinks we don't remember things--but she is wrong. A nice montage to be playing over and over would be of all the times she said this kind of stuff. She and shiff were shedding crocodile tears--really, oh, my, to think it has come to where we much impeach the President, no one wants this to have had to happen, blah, blah, blah. Bet they were dancing and doing high fives when the vote came down--for something they have been pushing for since Jan 20, 2017. And have publicly and loudly been do so.

  • Firewagon

    11/01/2019 03:59 PM

    "....the economy is still going strong, even stronger than expected." Hey Gov., there must be a fly in the pudding. Julian Epstein, on some FOX show, was pointing out the under 2% growth, 1.9%, saying the president's touting of some 4% growth rate as never going to happen, and even repeating 2% was unlikely! He definitely 'outted' himself as a non-supporter of this president. Did note, however, that you left off the "growth rate" numbers;)

  • Sondra Andersen

    11/01/2019 03:14 PM

    I am so thankful for your insightful (often humerus) remarks that keep me "sane" in an insane world...and grateful God is in charge.
    Sondra Andersen

  • David Baker

    11/01/2019 01:18 PM

    Truth! Spot On Governor, thank you.

  • Betty R Reisinger

    11/01/2019 12:42 PM

    Nancy Pelosi should be terminated from her position because of infectiveness of her job, inability to manage her caucus, like of leadership and productivity. The Democrats should be held liable for the cost of three plus years of non-productivity paid for by taxpayers. Any other business would not/could not tolerate such activities that citizens of the U.S. have endured for this time period.