Latest News

November 2, 2023



Blessings on you and your family from all the Huckabee team! 

Mike Huckabee


So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Galatians 3:26-27

New Ambassador to Israel is approved by the Senate

Tuesday, the Senate approved former Obama Treasury Secretary Jack Lew as our new Ambassador to Israel. Lew was touted by supporters for being an observant Jew, but as noted here, he’s also a rabid partisan who strongly supported Obama’s anti-Israel policies, was critical of Benjamin Netanyahu, and backed Obama’s Iran nuclear deal to the hilt.

Boy, the Dems sure have a way of picking the right person at the right time, don’t they?


Here’s just one of the more bizarre examples of how insane the Israel haters and Hamas supporters are…

Some reporting on Donald Trump’s judge and gag order

Newsweek reports that despite pressure from the Biden DOJ, the judge in the ludicrous prosecution of Donald Trump over January 6th will not threaten him with jail if he violates the gag order that she shouldn’t have imposed in the first place, but just reinstated…and which his comments about his former Attorney General Bill Barr (who attacked him first) likely violated, which shows just one of the many problems with trying to limit a candidate’s freedom of speech during an election campaign.

This article has more details…

And if you’d like an expert legal opinion from a non-Trump-supporter on why these gag orders are unconstitutional (and even the Trump-hating ACLU agrees!), here’s Jonathan Turley explaining it. He also reminds us that prosecutor Jack Smith has a history of trampling on defendants’ rights and trying to destroy Republicans by stretching the law to an egregious degree, so much so that his conviction of former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court.

Snap, crackle, pop

A couple of top Biden officials got roasted like chestnuts in the Senate Tuesday. DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who continues to lie about the border being secure even as thousands of unvetted illegal entrants pour into the US every day, got his rear end handed to him by Sen. Josh Hawley.

Hawley asked him about a DHS employee who posted a photo of a paragliding Hamas terrorist with a machine gun invading Israel with the caption “Free Palestine,’ and asked if she still worked at the DHS. Mayorkas tried to pull a Greta Thunberg-style “How dare you?!” and puffed that the question maligned DHS workers and was “despicable,” but Hawley was having none of it. 

He cut off Mayorkas and snapped, "Don’t come to this hearing room when Israel has been invaded and Jewish students are barricaded in libraries in this country and cannot be escorted out because they are threatened for their lives. You have employees who are celebrating genocide, and you are saying it’s despicable for me to ask the question? Has she been fired?"

Short answer: no. She’s on “administrative leave.” How comforting.

Hawley also asked if the DHS is considering revoking the visas of foreign students who are publicly calling for the destruction of Israel and the genocide of Jews. Mayorkas’ nitpicky response that there is a distinction between "espousing or endorsing terrorist ideology and speech that is odious” was so odious that it makes me wonder if he even knows what “DHS” stands for.

FBI Director Christopher Wray also took time out from pursuing our biggest terrorist threat (Trump voters) to appear before the Senate Homeland Security Committee. He warned that the threat of a terrorist attack against Americans had been raised to a “whole other level” due to the outbreak of violence in the Middle East. But when Sen. Rick Scott asked him the ultimate no-brainer question – Are we safer from terrorist threats now than when Joe Biden took office? – Scott fell silent. After a long, awkward pause, he gave a typical, DC evasive non-answer that I’m not even going to bother to quote (you can read it at the link if you’re a fan of empty verbiage.)

After the hearing, the White House said it "couldn't possibly answer" whether terrorists had already crossed over the southern border. I’ll take that as a “yes.”

 Intel Analyst: Open border policy has made US unsafe

Not that it would take any particular expertise or psychic abilities to predict this, but an intel analyst with 39 years’ experience says he believes, with as close to 100% certainty as possible, that the US will suffer multiple terrorist attacks over the next 14 months. This is based largely on his assumption that up to 2 million potential terrorists from all over the world are already in the US, with their entry aided, abetted and funded by the Biden Administration and its open border policy.

Democrats are working overtime to slander Speaker Mike Johnson

Speaker Mike Johnson has barely been on the job for a week, and Democrats and the media (pardon my redundancy) are already having conniption fits trying to find ways to slander him. So far, here’s what they’ve come up with:

He’s endangering the world by making Congress vote on one issue at a time instead of, say, attaching Ukraine aid to a bill to help Israel, and by insisting that new spending be paid for somehow.

Also, he’s a “fascist” and a “nationalist,” comparable to the Taliban and the Mullahs in Iran, and also like the lunatics who stage mass shootings, and all because he’s a Bible-believing Christian. His response to these “disgusting” false attacks on his faith makes me like him all the more.

Why Elon bought Twitter

In a blockbuster interview with Joe Rogan, Elon Musk was asked why he bought Twitter. His eye-opening response:

He said Twitter was having a corrosive effect on society; Twitter headquarters was in an area of San Francisco that looks like a zombie apocalypse, and it was clear as you walked around that it was “the end of civilization.” Musk said he asked himself what philosophy led to this? And while that destructive niche philosophy would normally stay localized, Twitter was being used to propagate that “mind virus” worldwide and suppress any dissenting views.

He compared Twitter to Pravda and said when he took it over, it was suppressing Republicans at ten times the rate of Democrats (that’s odd; I was assured by all our top media outlets that the social media censorship of conservatives was a false, rightwing conspiracy theory.)

Musk also gave his opinion of George Soros: that he “fundamentally hates humanity,” and that’s why he does things that “erode the fabric of society,” like funding the election of DAs who refuse to prosecute criminals.

That provides a perfect lead-in to this story: Guess which wildly misnamed dark money organization is spending millions funding the groups that are staging these pro-Hamas, anti-Israel protests? That’s right, now guess where its money comes from. Right again!

Middle East War For Dummies:

For anyone who thinks the attack on Israel was about freedom, oppression, self-rule for the Palestinian people or any other high-falutin concept, let this leader of Hamas make it crystal clear for you: The Palestinian nation is one of “martyrs” who are proud to die for their cause, that cause being the “annihilation of Israel.” Got it?

Democrats aren’t protecting women

Any women who still think, for some inexplicable reason, that Democrats are the party of protecting women might want to know that thanks to Biden’s open border, New York City now has a new red-light district where Venezuelan migrant women are working as prostitutes.

Mayor Eric Adams slammed leftist activists who are trying to legalize prostitution, saying, “This is where idealism collides with realism… I’ve had elected officials tell me that the women are just trying work – ‘why are you trying to harm them?’ – [but] there are real issues around illegal sex work, from STDs to sex trafficking girls to violence.”

Incidentally, it’s not clear whether the women were working as prostitutes before coming here or turned to it after arriving. I guess because we wouldn’t want to ask any personal questions about someone’s background before letting them come into the US illegally.

Car company GM backtracks on green energy agenda

I suppose too many people like me have been telling the truth about the limitations and actual pollution levels of electric cars, because GM just became the latest automaker to admit they flushed billions down the toilet on the insane assumption that Joe Biden could predict the future of automotive technology. He can’t even do his OWN job!

There are solid reasons why most Americans don’t want to buy EVs. They’re a developing technology, so you may pay through the nose for one now and lose your shirt if you try to resell it in two or three years. And while they’re nice toys for rich liberals who like to buy the latest tech and virtue signal as they drive to and from Whole Foods, they’re useless for what most Americans need: vehicles that can reliably go long distances at high speeds, carry heavy loads, pull trailers, refill quickly and safely, and keep running no matter what the weather conditions. And I didn’t even get into the issues with the batteries, like mining the materials, disposing of old ones, and putting them out if they burst into flames.

I’ve made this observation before, but it’s always worth repeating: EVs’ virtues were wildly oversold to the public, they’re far more costly than we were told they would be, and they create big messes that the media tries to ignore. They’re the Joe Biden of cars.

Related: In ultra-lefty, super green Boulder, Colorado, the school district just ordered five new diesel school buses. Why not electric buses? Well, they wanted to, but they admitted that when you have mountains (not to mention cold winters), you need buses that can reliably drive uphill without suddenly running out of juice and rolling to the bottom.

Here’s a double dose of Kurt Schlichter

While these columns aren’t as funny as Kurt usually is, they make some very important points and I’d say both fall into the “Must-Read” category.

Sen. Johnson to Wray:  How can the FBI hide information from SENATORS?

While testifying under oath, FBI Director Christopher Wray, already well known for his tendency not to answer even the most basic questions from legislators, would not even say for sure whether he’d cooperate with Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley’s oversight of the FBI’s handling of Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings.

Wray was testifying before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee when pressed by Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson about a letter Sen. Grassley had written to him and Attorney General Merrick Garland about there being more than 40 confidential human sources who had provided the FBI with “criminal information” about Joe, James and Hunter Biden.  (Recall our report from a few days back about the FBI mislabeling it “foreign disinformation” when they knew good and well it wasn’t.)  He wanted to hear from Wray’s own mouth whether the FBI had followed up on this information or shut the investigation down.

Johnson first quoted part of Grassley’s letter, followed by part of a column from THE WALL STREET JOURNAL about it and some of the testimony from Western Pennsylvania U.S. Attorney Scott Brady, who’d said the FBI had stonewalled his attempts to investigate Hunter’s relationship with corrupt Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings.

As you know, it was Brady who vetted that FBI “1023” form, an agent’s notes from a follow-up meeting with a confidential human source (CHS) who said Burisma founder Mykola Zlochevsky (whose dog Hunter is dumber than) had claimed to have “paid $5 million to one Biden and $5 million to another Biden.”  Brady confirmed that this allegation of bribery came from an extremely credible CHS with a long history of supplying information to the FBI.

But when asked a direct question by Sen. Johnson about what the FBI intended to do abut this information, Wray was his usual cagey self.

“Senator Grassley’s letter concludes that he has obtained names from his whistleblower, 25 Department of Justice [and] FBI personnel to interview at a future date,” Sen. Johnson said.  “He is also requesting a bunch of information.  Will you provide those FBI personnel for interviews with his office and mine and will you provide those documents?”

That should be a simple, “Yes, of course, Sen. Johnson.”  But Wray said, “I’ll have to review the specific requests and we’ll see how we can be helpful.”  In other words, don’t hold him to anything.

As the DAILY CALLER reports, “The FBI previously declined to comment on the Grassley letter and referred [us] to Special Counsel David Weiss…”  And, after Brady’s testimony, the Bureau gave the news outlet this spiel:  “The FBI’s investigative work is thorough, methodical and rigorous.  We follow the facts without regard for politics.  Any information we receive must be verified, whether it is a tip provided by a member of the public or information provided by a source.  While other opinions and criticism often come with the job, we will continue to follow the facts wherever they lead, do things by the book, and speak through our work.”

Well, they’re speaking through their work, all right.  But their work includes testifying before House and Senate committees.  And one of the things they’re telling us in their testimony is that they can’t even answer a basic yes-or-no question.

Sen. Johnson wasn’t having it.

“The problem I have is I simply cannot trust what the FBI is providing me,” he said to Wray.  “And I don’t say that with any joy in my heart.  I think that’s a travesty.  The American people want to believe and to trust the FBI.  We want credibility and integrity restored to your institution.  But Director Wray, you have not done that since assuming office, and I could go through a long laundry list of the reasons why trust has been violated.”

He said to Wray, “I’m happy to sit down and meet with you and go over these things in detail, but [first]...ask me, ‘What can I do to restore trust?’  Start by being transparent.”

Wray countered Johnson’s remarks by citing a dramatic increase in the number of those applying to be special agents (let’s hope they’re not all Ivy League grads), defending in high-blown language the “integrity and professionalism” of the FBI, and taking exception to Johnson’s characterization of the Bureau “in this particular case.”

“That’s not how I characterized it,” Johnson replied.  “I’m talking about partisanship at the top with some specific partisan actors.  I said the vast majority of the 33,000 are people with integrity.”

Wray described himself as “a Republican appointee” and “a lifelong Republican” and tried to use that to counter Johnson’s allegations of bias.  Americans who lean conservative/constitutionalist would say the “Republican” label doesn’t tell us anything.  Robert Mueller was widely touted as a registered Republican, appointed FBI director by George H. W. Bush.

“I’m happy to read you chapter and verse of all the reasons why that credibility has been destroyed,” Johnson said, and he could have, too.  We would have popped the popcorn.

Sen. Johnson is masterful in this examination of Wray.  The video is here, and it’s a don’t-miss.

Johnson had a great question for Wray:  “Why is it that --- this makes no sense --- I’m an elected U.S. Senator; I have the highest security clearance; why is it that unelected members of the FBI can see the documents unredacted but I can’t, even in a secure briefing room?  That makes no sense whatsoever.  But that’s exactly how federal law enforcement, Department of Justice, FBI, who are the law, remain above the law, remain above scrutiny, and completely scorn our constitutional responsibility and authority to provide oversight.  We just can’t do it…”

That’s one policy we’ve always wondered about and have never before heard challenged this directly.  If Sen. Johnson is a U.S. Senator, serving on a committee conducting its constitutional responsibility of oversight, and he has a top level security clearance, why is he not able to go into a secure briefing room and read anything he wants or needs to?  Why does some bureaucrat get to decide what he can and cannot see, blackening entire pages of documents and interview notes?

Trump’s legal team hints at evidence of WH collusion in classified documents trial

Investigative reporter Julie Kelly has been in Judge Aileen Cannon’s courtroom for President Trump’s classified documents trial, and Wednesday she said that Trump’s attorneys informed her of evidence suggesting the Biden White House collaborated with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the “Justice” Department, and intelligence agencies to determine which documents should be included in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s indictment of Trump.

The Trump team say they have “extensive communications.”  If memory serves, Biden has said the White House is staying out of that entirely.  But then, he’s also said he’s never spoken to his son about business.

So, Biden’s White House was “colluding” with prosecutors who were putting together a case against his main presidential rival for ‘24?  Does anyone see a problem with this?  We hate to bring up the words “banana republic” again (sigh), but they’re the first ones that come to mind.

They also apparently have a letter from June of this year (shortly after Smith indicted Trump) asking the Department of Energy to revoke Trump’s active security clearance.

“If substantiated,” Kelly writes, “the development could shed light on a coordinated effort to target the former President and might significantly impact the case’s trajectory.”

THE GATEWAY PUNDIT has more details on where they are in the classified documents case.  On Tuesday, Trump and his team visited a SCIF (“Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility,” or secure room) to view documents related to the case.

Judge Cannon sees the problems --- clearly created on purpose by the special counsel --- with scheduling Trump’s multiple court dates right on top of each other and, on Wednesday, signaled she might postpone the trial, which for now is set to start May 20.  As Trump and his attorneys put it, these dates require them “to be in two places at once.”  Also, discovery in the classified documents case is not nearly complete.

According to Julie Kelly, when the DOJ’s Jay Bratt told her the March 4 trial date for Trump’s J6 case in Washington, DC, won’t run into the May 20 trial date, Judge Cannon admonished him for his “level of understanding to these realities.”

So, Weiss DID need permission from DOJ to charge Hunter Biden

All this back and forth.  But it appears we do have a fairly clear answer to the question of whether Delaware U.S. Attorney (and now Special Counsel) David Weiss had the independent authority to charge Hunter Biden.

He didn’t.  At least on the tax charges.  That’s according to testimony reviewed by the DAILY CALLER.

In October, Stuart Goldberg, acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Criminal Matters at the DOJ Tax Division, testified before the House Judiciary Committee, clarifying for them how the process generally works, adding that in discussions in which “some agreement couldn’t be reached, then it would have to be decided by somebody else in higher authority.”  And the DOJ Tax Division would still have to approve tax charges, according to Goldberg.

It sure doesn’t sound as though Weiss had the “ultimate authority” that Garland, the “higher authority,” testified Weiss had.

Oh, and remember the tax charges against Hunter that, after the crash-and-burn of his “sweetheart deal,” were dropped so they could be refiled in another court?  Weiss has still not refiled them.

The Biden financial scandal:  lots of news from Oversight Committee

Rep. James Comer must be working nonstop!  Here’s what he’s shared most recently…

Comer says that of President Biden’s known 82,000 “pseudonym” emails, only 14 have been turned over, and that this is “looking more like obstruction every day.”

On Wednesday, Comer released bank records showing Joe Biden personally took $40,000 from various family members soon after they received the money from Chinese business associates.  Comer lays out the dizzying money trail.

Finally, the 20 shell companies set up for the Biden family each have “dozens and dozens of bank accounts.”  Now that they have the accounts, Comer says, and now that they can trace the money, they can start subpoenaing the Bidens.  “We have mountains of evidence,” he says, “and now we’re ready.”


Thank you for reading my newsletter. 

For more news, visit my website.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

Comments 1-3 of 3

  • Teresa Carstensen

    11/03/2023 12:00 AM

    [...Despite investigating the background of the Trump-Russia nonsense, John Durham never touched the DNC hacking claim – the core of the Mueller report. Why? Because Durham knew the U.S. Government threw a bag over Assange to protect the fraudulent Trump-Russia and Russian interference claims.

    ...The “Russian Malicious Cyber Activity – Joint Analysis Report” (full pdf) is pure nonsense. It outlines nothing more than vague and disingenuous typical hacking activity that is no more substantive than any other hacking report on any other foreign actor. However, it was needed to help frame the Russian interference narrative.

    There were no Russian diplomats involved; there was no Russian election interference; there was no Russian hacking of the DNC; it was all a fraud created by the intelligence community (IC), FBI and Main Justice to support Hillary Clinton’s lies and then cover their own targeting tracks.

    ...using the resources and timeline from within that Yahoo article and the specific details we have assembled that paints a clear picture about what interests existed for the Deep State, the Intelligence apparatus and the Mueller-Weissmann special counsel.

    This fully cited review is not for the faint of heart. This is a journey that could shock many; it could alarm more and will likely force more than a few to reevaluate just what the purpose was for Mike Pompeo within the Donald Trump administration.]...See MORE:

  • David French

    11/02/2023 07:18 PM

    Outstanding read!

  • Carl E Serkland

    11/02/2023 02:46 PM

    A new name for "illegal immigrants" should be "International Trespassers". It is accurate and carries the onus of criminality as well. The idea of an "immigrant" is kind of neutral, and liberals want to say that "nobody is illegal". Entering a location without permission IS trespassing, and they are doing it from one nation to another. National borders have long been recognized as lines to be crossed ONLY with proper permission/documentation.