Good morning! Blessings on you and your family, and from all the Huckabee staff!
Today's newsletter includes:
- The coolest story EVER: President Trump sues Hillary
- Fighting back inside Disney
- And much more
1. DAILY BIBLE VERSE
“I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world.”
If you have a favorite Bible Verse you want to see in one of our newsletters, please email [email protected].
2. The coolest story EVER: President Trump sues Hillary
Before we get to the big breaking news --- and, yes, it really is the coolest story ever --- there’s also related news out of John Durham’s special counsel probe. In his request for an extended deadline for his production of classified discovery in the case against Igor Danchenko (who provided “dossier” information to Christopher Steele), Durham reveals that he plans to produce a large amount of classified material this coming week.
And now, fun times: On March 24, in federal court in Florida, President Trump, represented by the Ticktin Law Group of Florida and Habba Madaio & Associates LLP of New Jersey, sued former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, the DNC and “dossier” author Christopher Steele, along with approximately 30 others involved in the Russia Hoax, for carrying out a plot to “weave a false narrative” that Trump was colluding with Russian actors to win the 2016 election.
The New York Post was happy to announce it.
In the document, there’s a long list of names of those being sued, and the cast of characters will be familiar to regular readers of this newsletter, the reporting of John Solomon, and the legal filings of John Durham. We have, in addition to Hillary and Steele, quite a lineup: Michael Sussmann and Marc Elias of Perkins Coie, Debbie Wasserman Schulz, Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Hillary campaign chairman Robby Mook, Hillary communication adviser Phillipe Reines, Glenn Simpson and Fusion GPS, Rodney Joffe and Neustar, and many others whose names you’ll recognize. The FBI is also well represented, with Spygate Hall-of-Famers such as James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith (who has already pleaded guilty after being charged with falsifying an official document) and Andrew McCabe. Trump also lists some “fictitious and unknown” persons and entities, to be revealed, I suppose, as Durham continues.
“In the run-up to the 2016 Presidential election,” it says, “Hillary Clinton and her cohorts orchestrated an unthinkable plot –- one that shocks the conscience and is an affront to this nation’s democracy.” The plot they created to exploit sensitive data sources to “weave a false narrative” about him was “so outrageous, subversive and incendiary that even the events of Watergate pale in comparison.”
That is true. As Paragraph 9 says, “In short, the Defendants, blinded by political ambition, orchestrated a malicious conspiracy to disseminate patently false and injurious information about Donald J. Trump and his campaign, all in the hopes of destroying his life, political career and rigging the 2016 Presidential election in favor of Hillary Clinton.” The suit goes on to say that when their plan failed and Trump was elected anyway, “the Defendants’ efforts continued unabated, merely shifting their focus to undermining his presidential administration.”
When you have time, perhaps over this weekend, please read through the whole 108-page document --- it makes for highly entertaining and satisfying reading, especially for my readers who are already familiar with the story. (If you know people who haven’t kept up, please share the documentcloud.org link above.) It really kicks in on page 13, with the “Statement of Facts,” which lays out the whole plot step by step. Importantly, it explains the primary motivation for the Hillary campaign, which was summarized by a DNC memo that had been obtained by by an individual using the name Guccifer 2.0, revealing that the DNC, because of Hillary’s own email scandal, needed to “muddy the waters around ethics, transparency, and campaign finance attacks on HRC.”
Leave it to Hillary and the DNC to muddy the waters around ethics and transparency, while they wade right in.
So, how can a public figure who was running for President sue for damages because of what was said about him? The suit makes it clear that “Trump has sustained significant injuries and damages.” To date, he claims that monetary damages to him, his campaign and his organization are in excess of $24 million, not counting “the loss of existing and future business opportunities.” That sounds like a conservative estimate.
“The Plaintiff,” the suit says, “does not claim nor seek any compensation for damage to his reputation, but rather, he seeks damages for the cost of dealing with the legal issues and political issues, which he was required to spend to redress the injurious falsities which were propounded by the Defendants, and all other losses incurred due to the tortious conduct of the Defendants.”
Go to page 60, and –- gotta love this –- you’ll see that Trump is also suing Clinton, the DNC, Sussmann, Elias and Perkins Coie under the RICO statute. “At all relevant times,” the suit says, these defendants “constituted an associated in-fact enterprise” within the meaning of that law, with a clearly delineated, ongoing organizational framework and command structure for carrying out its objectives: the Clinton Campaign and the DNC were at all relevant times mutually controlled by Clinton, who worked in tandem with their joint counsel, Perkins Coie, whose partners, Sussmann and Elias, simultaneously worked as general counsel for the Clinton Campaign and the DNC.”
Trump accuses them of a conspiracy to obstruct justice, saying they “willfully, knowingly, deliberately, and corruptly obstructed, influenced and impeded...the due administration of justice, and/or one or more official proceedings, including, but not limited to, Crossfire Hurricane and/or other investigations by the FBI, the CIA, the IG, and the DOJ.”
The suit goes on to allege a Count II RICO conspiracy, incorporating many more of the defendants, that deals with the time Trump was in office as President. He says that they “knowingly agreed, conspired, and acted in concert for the express purpose of injuring the Plaintiff’s political career and/or impeding his ability to effectively govern through a pattern of racketeering activity.”
The allegations go on and on, through numerous counts of conspiracy to commit malicious prosecution, theft of trade secrets, and violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Stored Communications Act. Then, on page 95, it concentrates its ire on Hillary herself and the DNC, alleging that “Hillary was fully aware of the plan and hired and instructed the necessary parties to make it happen.”
Trump demands a jury trial “of all issues so triable.”
According to a story in The Epoch Times, the judge assigned to the case is a Clinton nominee, U.S. District Court Judge Donald Middlebrooks. Yes, we join you in wondering how that’s going to work. According to the court docket, U.S. Magistrate Judge Shaniek Maynard may handle some or all of the proceedings. We would think “all.”
We like what Bonchie at RedState.com said: that Trump is “suing everyone and their mother” connected with the Trump-Russia Hoax. Yes, this hoax involved a tremendous number of participants, but that’s one reason why it’s the most stupendous political scandal in our lifetimes. True, we don’t know if he’ll prevail in court, as it’s almost impossible for a public figure to win what essentially is a defamation case, but I have a feeling that’s not the main reason he’s doing this. He’s getting the facts out. This one’s for the history books.
3. Ukraine headlines
Here is today’s Fox News link to the latest bulletins on the Russian invasion of Ukraine:
Among the latest headlines: The president of Turkey, which has been hosting diplomatic talks between Russia and Ukraine, said that Putin and Zelenskyy are near consensus on key issues and there could be a ceasefire soon. He said, “However, there is the issue of Crimea and Donbass, which is impossible for Ukraine to consent to.”
Ukraine claimed that 300 people were killed in Russia’s bombing of a theater in Mariupol that Russia knew was being used as a refuge for civilians. They also claim that Russia has forcibly taken over 400,000 Ukrainian citizens, including 84,000 children, to Russia to use as hostages to try to force Ukraine to surrender.
President Biden will meet with the President of Poland today. Also, Biden and the president of the European Commission announced a joint task force to help the EU end its reliance on Russian oil (say, maybe we need one of those, too.) Biden said Putin uses energy to "coerce and manipulate his neighbors" and uses the profits from its sale to "drive his war machine,” so not relying on Russian oil is "not only the right thing to do from a moral standpoint" but "it’s going to put us on a stronger strategic footing." I guess that applies only to Europe. Biden also announced plans to increase liquefied natural gas exports to Europe by 15 billion cubic meters this year. Gee, I wonder where he’s going to get it?
4. Biden's Press Conference
While meeting with NATO Thursday, President Biden gave a press conference that did not inspire confidence in American leadership, to put it mildly. RedState.com has more, including a number of video clips.
As always with Biden, it was a little hard at times to figure out precisely what he was saying (wait, did he say he was working on increasing food shortages?) Some of the more jarring moments included his adamant denial that he ever said sanctions would deter Putin (in fact, he and his spokespeople said exactly that.), He insisted, “Sanctions never deter” and angrily snapped at a reporter that today’s actions won’t deter Putin (so why are we increasing sanctions then?) There was also the disturbing moment when he admitted to giving China US intelligence about Russia and said he expected them to help Russia’s invasion. And the time when he inadvertently gave away where he was going next.
Perhaps the most worrisome and confusing moment was when he was asked what the US and NATO would do if Putin used chemical weapons. He said that would “trigger a response in kind” (does that mean we’d use chemical weapons?), adding, “We would respond if he uses it. The nature of the response would depend on the nature of the use.” That eerily echoed his earlier blunder of seemingly okaying a “limited incursion” by Russia that many saw as giving Putin a green light to invade Ukraine. Was he saying that we might not respond as harshly if Putin only uses chemical weapons on people a little? It’s impossible to figure out what he was saying.
That doesn’t even get into the part where he once again repeated the endlessly-debunked lie that he decided he had to run for President when he heard Trump say there were “very good people” among the neo-Nazis in the Charlottesville riots - which Trump did NOT say. Besides, with all that's happening now, why is he even still talking about that, much less repeating something that he must’ve been told wasn’t true at least a hundred times by now? Biden’s obsessive repetition of this thoroughly discredited anti-Trump trope is starting to remind me of Snoopy forever shaking his fist at the sky and shouting, “Curse you, Red Baron!!”
5. Women's History Month
As we enter the final week of March, don’t forget that March is Women’s History Month and March 8th was International Women’s Day.
It’s also the first Women’s Month in history during which a person with male genitalia was declared an NCAA women’s swimming champion, a woman with an advanced degree from Harvard swore under oath that she was incapable of defining what a “woman” was, and countless people were banned from Twitter for daring to say that a biological male wasn’t a woman. With this sudden society-wide professed amnesia about what a “woman” us, maybe it’s time to change the name of this annual observance to “International Whatchamacallit Month.”
For years, I’ve said that I could never be a liberal because it requires you to believe 10 impossible things before breakfast every day. But that at least used to mean things that required a nodding acquaintance with reality, like knowing enough about economics to recognize that you can’t spend your way out of debt. Now, it requires you to believe things that are so far beyond impossible that even a Basset hound could grasp the insanity, like claiming there are no biological differences that differentiate male from female.
But I do have to feel some sympathy for the poor, harried propagandists of the liberal media who are called upon to justify the ever-more-deluded claims of today’s loony left. Like the USA Today writer who resorted to quoting “philosophers of biology” and “gender law scholars” to try to convince readers that science has no simple answer as to how to define “woman.”
My favorite of all the mocking tweets at that link was, “Those quotation marks need to be taken off the word ‘woman’ and put around the word ‘science.’”
But read it all. Not only is it fun, but all the open mockery without fear of being “canceled” is a great sign that they’ve so overplayed their hand in forcing their insanity on us all that the backlash has begun, and those of us who’ve been fighting the lonely battle to defend reality are finally winning.
6. Fighting back inside Disney
I already wrote about this, but here’s more on the subject and it bears repeating and more publicity. It’s more information about that open letter by a group of anonymous Disney employees, describing how a cadre of leftist radicals has taken over the company, bullying and silencing anyone whose political or religious views differ from theirs, and creating an uncomfortable and hostile workplace for conservatives, Christians or anyone else who doesn’t embrace their radical “progressive” and LGBTQ ideology.
I’d think Disney stockholders might especially want to pay attention to this story and let their concerns about it be known because when you start hearing words like “hostile work environment,” that sounds as if this could evolve from an anonymous complaint into a massive discrimination lawsuit.
7. Sad news
We are sad to report that former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright died Wednesday of cancer at 84. She was surrounded by friends and her family, who called her a “tireless champion of democracy and human rights.” Their full statement and more information are here:
Secretary Albright came to the US in 1948, when her family fled a communist coup in Czechoslovakia. Three of her Jewish grandparents had died in concentration camps. Her family converted to Roman Catholicism, and she didn’t learn of her Jewish heritage until decades later. She served as UN Ambassador becoming the first woman Secretary of State, back when people actually knew what a “woman” was. She went on to become a professor at Georgetown University, wrote several books and received the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2012. Our sincere condolences to her family.
8. Loosened Standards
The US Army announced that starting April 1, standards will be loosened for the Army Combat Fitness Test after it was found that only 52% of women enlistees could pass the original test, compared to 92% of male enlistees.
I for one am shocked at the Army’s regressive transphobia in suggesting that males have an inherent advantage in terms of physical strength and endurance over females. If the test seems to prove that is the reality, then obviously, they need to alter reality.
The best suggestion for dealing with this came from Instapundit blog master, Prof. Glenn Reynolds, who asked, “Can’t they fix that by just identifying as men? I dunno, I’m not a biologist.”
I Just Wanted to Say
Thank you for reading my newsletter.