Reader questions our "deep state" coverage. Our reply.

May 29, 2019

'Huckabee' writer/researcher Laura Ainsworth has spent a lot of time delving into the issues brought up by this reader, so she asked to respond...


From William T:

To say that the Steele dossier should not be believed because it included far-fetched stories is not reasonable because we know from payments to Stormy Daniels by Trump and to, at least, one other woman that Mr. Trump is not beyond doing something ‘far-fetched.

I also think that you should note that the ‘insurance policy’ has another explanation and it could also be true, and that is the investigation into Russia activities around the Trump 2016 campaign was proceeding slowly, as an ‘insurance policy,’ because it was expected that Hillary Clinton would win. The assumption, I think, was IF Mr. Trump won, the investigation could be completed and IF collusion was found then it could be addressed. 

I also think you should consider again that if ex-FBI director James Comey had been determined to ensure Hillary Clinton would win, he would not have ‘re-opened’ the ‘Hillary Clinton email investigation’ just weeks before the election and announced it to the public....right?

Thanks for your kind consideration of my thoughts on this.

Commentary continues below advertisement

From Laura:

Thanks from the Gov. and the Huckabee team for your rational letter. We don’t get many such letters from our readers on the left, let me tell you. They typically contain extremely hateful and vile language and little in the way of cohesive thought. (We don’t publish the hateful ones, on the principle that our “gentle readers” deserve better than such trash. If we got more dissenting opinions that actually made some sense and didn’t get nasty and abusive, we’d publish more of them and answer them as well!) You, on the other hand, seem like a reasonable person. But reasonable people can disagree, so I’ll try to explain to you why we’ve reached different conclusions from yours.


Let’s take your points one by one. First, payments made to women like Stormy Daniels aren’t farfetched by any means. They happen frequently. The threat of such demands comes with the territory for high-profile showbiz billionaires, whether said billionaires actually did anything untoward or not and whether they’re in politics or not. (They also wouldn’t necessarily be seen as campaign expenditures, as there are huge personal reasons for wanting to make women like ‘Stormy’ go away, whether said billionaire is running for office or not.)


In contrast, the story about the prostitutes in Moscow IS, we think, quite farfetched, precisely for the reason stated in the commentary; namely, that while in Moscow, Trump had to be aware his every move was being watched by the Kremlin. He knew his hotel was almost certainly bugged and equipped with cameras. Trump is not an idiot, no matter how hard people on the left try to paint him as one, nor are the people who were there as his entourage. And people who know Trump personally can cite other solid reasons why he would NEVER do this. (It’s like, hypothetically, if someone came up with a story that Trump drinks –- people who are close to him and familiar with his story KNOW that couldn’t possibly be true.) This prostitutes-in-Moscow story seemed crazy on its face even to members of the anti-Trump media who saw it in the summer of 2016 when Steele was shopping his “dossier” around.


Next, you are right that the “insurance policy” reference could possibly have another meaning. If all we had were this one text from Strzok to Page, it wouldn’t be enough to make his intentions clear. (Although I believe Lisa Page testified to Congress that his texts meant just what they appeared to mean.) But I’m going to borrow a term from James Comey and say that Strzok’s “insurance policy” email is part of a “mosaic.” The people heading up the “Trump/Russia” investigation hated Trump and desperately didn’t want him to be President, and evidence is mounting that they knew perfectly well they were phony-ing up evidence to get a FISA warrant. They were knowingly working with a source who also desperately didn’t want him to be President.

Commentary continues below advertisement

I’m sure they DID expect Hillary to win, but that certainly doesn’t excuse what they were doing in the summer and fall of 2016 (and possibly before). In a way, it helps explain their activities, as they likely figured that once Hillary was in office, no one would ever find out. (Of course, today we have 20/20 hindsight, in that Trump did NOT lose and “collusion” [conspiracy] between his campaign and Russia was NOT found.) We still don’t know what evidence they had in the first place that warranted spying, as the “evidence” they presented to the FISA court was bogus and they knew it. Adam Schiff claimed for a long time that he personally had it, so where is it? William Barr would surely love to see it.


Finally, we’ve also looked closely at Comey’s re-opening of the Hillary email case just before the election. This action is being used by his defenders to suggest that he was objective in his handling of her case (even though we’ve seen tons of other evidence that her case received highly unusual treatment and that “the fix was in”). However, it makes sense to me that in their own special way, the top people at the FBI were using this timing to try to HELP Hillary by minimizing the damage of the Weiner laptop debacle. Comey himself admits to political calculations during that time in his memoir, A HIGHER LOYALTY. His decisions were driven by the assumption that Hillary would become President.


At the time Comey announced the re-opening of the “Mid-Year Exam,” the FBI had already known for A MONTH about the emails on Weiner’s laptop. Obviously, they had a serious dilemma on their hands. (Just think how much grief this country could have been spared if Hillary had just followed the law in the first place and used the government server like everybody else! I digress.) If they waited till after the election to bring it up, that would have been correctly seen as a blatantly political move. Talk about a constitutional crisis! No, they’d HAVE to go public before the election, much as they might hate to.

Commentary continues below advertisement

It had been discovered there were nearly 700,000 emails on the laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner, Huma Abedin’s disgraced then-husband, that needed to be checked for classified material. With the last-minute timing of his decision to re-open, only 3,077 were actually viewed, in a marathon 12-hour session, though at the time Comey maintained the whole job had miraculously been completed, thanks to “the wizardry of our technology.” (Ha, remember that?) Then Comey said that Clinton should not be recommended for criminal charges after all, clearing the way for the election in just days.


To quote the excellent August 23, 2018, report by Paul Sperry in Real Clear Investigations, “Many Clinton supporters believe the 11th-hour re-opening of a case that shadowed her campaign was a form of sabotage that cost her the election. But the evidence shows Comey and his inner circle acted only after worried agents and prosecutors in New York forced their hand. At the prodding of Attorney General Loretta Lynch, they then worked to reduce and rush through, rather than carefully examine, potentially damaging new evidence.”


Hilary has used the re-opening of her case so close to the election as one of her many, many excuses for losing. But her supporters at the FBI were apparently just trying to make the best of a bad situation that she herself had created.


Thanks again for writing, William, and I hope I’ve addressed your concerns. Of course, many questions remain; William Barr is working to get the answers and put everything possible out in the open, where it needs to be. Those who have much to lose will pull out all the stops to try to discredit him, but I think they’re wasting their time. This guy is a straight shooter, and he seems to be one of those rare gems in Washington who can put two and two together and actually get four.



Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Comments 1-14 of 14


    08/31/2019 06:20 PM

    Laura (and Gov. Huckabee),
    I did not comment on this discussion (between William T and Laura) earlier because I didn't get a chance to read it until late July. But since Comey is once again part of the recent news cycle, I would like to offer my own thoughts as to why he "re-opened" the Clinton email "investigation" when he did.
    In mid-September of 2016 the AP was reporting that in the previous (2012) general election, 35% of all ballots were cast early. The AP was also projecting that in the 2016 general election this number would continue to increase and that early voting would account for approx. 50% of ballots cast in key battleground states.
    As Laura pointed out, the FBI became aware of the Weiner laptop emails by late Sept. of 2016. But Comey waited until Oct. 28, 2016 (a Friday "dump") to send a letter to Congress informing them he was re-opening the "investigation", knowing it wouldn't become public or part of the major news cycle until late that day or the 29th (Sat.) By Sept 24, 2016, ONLY 6 states had begun early voting. But by Oct. 29, 2016, 36 states and the District of Columbia had commenced their early voting--- 24 of them by the weekend before!
    I think Comey had this timing (and strategy) in mind when selecting a date to send his letter to Congress. One does not have to be particularly devious (and the evidence repeatedly suggests that deviousness is part of Comey's nature) to realize that once a ballot is cast, it cannot be changed. This was Comey's calculation---to have as many ballots cast as possible, before he had to reveal additional proof of Hillary's criminal conduct---while at the same time, appearing to be non-political by not waiting 'til after the election.

  • LaVoe Potter

    06/12/2019 08:12 PM

    Kudos, Laura! Your reply to William T. is a masterpiece (in my humble opinion). You factually and patiently responded to all his stated concerns in detail. As a "Staff Writer", I am sure you are a treasured asset!

  • Holly Neely

    06/08/2019 08:04 PM

    Laura, is it noteworthy that William T is comparing a wealthy Billionaire's desire to not have his own name defamed, to the intentional creation of a written, unverifiable, piece of communication designed to defame and discredit a candidate for president, with the purpose of interfering with a U.S. election?

    I'm not sure those two can be compared. One is protecting oneself. The other is an attempt to falsely affect an entire country. Aren't these different in weight? The first seems like a store owner's protection money to the mafia. If he doesn't pay it, the mafia will see to it that his store is robbed. The second seems like a gun for hire.

    It is great to see a letter from the other side asking a question in a polite manner, without verbal abuse.

  • David Colonna

    05/30/2019 09:48 AM

    It truly is refreshing to see someone from the left be some what logical in their thinking, especially since the mainstream media like CNN, CNBC, Huffington Post ,etc brainwash them with pure lies. I sincerely wish more from the left would understand how much better off they are today than within the Obama years (nice guy, but the worst President ever). I also cannot understand how anyone on the left can still vote for Democrats, look at all the major Democratic states how bad it is with extremely high taxes, massive regulations and massive corruption. Look at Illinois who has 3 past Governors in prison due to massive corruption. I pray daily for all left readers for God to reveal the truth and the light to them.

  • Matthew Nowell

    05/29/2019 09:33 PM

    Laura, Great response. I didn't realize that Comey was forced into action "only after worried agents and prosecutors in New York forced their hand".

  • Robert McFate

    05/29/2019 07:49 PM

    I see a sharks fin in the water approaching the DemonRATs and its name is Barr!

  • Adrian Rehak

    05/29/2019 06:36 PM

    Laura, Very well said. It is hard to imagine the horror we would be living in if Hillary had been elected. It would be much worse everyone than the nightmare President Trump has been and continues to be put through. We would be hundreds of miles down the road toward socialism/communism without Trump fighting it. Our economy would be pathetic. There would be very little chance of stopping the horror of murdering millions of babies in the future even as the liberal gestapo continues to promote evil far worse than the Holocaust. Thank you for your response to William T.

  • Patricia McMahon

    05/29/2019 02:58 PM

    Well said, Laura. William is a thoughtful thinker. Good to see some one "out there" in the real world is able to process conversations without going over the top. As they say in Australia
    "Good on you mate!" You both said your truths clearly and quietly. Thank you both.

  • Charles Greer

    05/29/2019 02:28 PM

    Excellent response to a complicated matter which William T. brought up. You made sense and I appreciate knowing what is REALLY going on with this crazy, mixed up government which we have now. THANK YOU!

  • Katherine Richardson

    05/29/2019 10:31 AM

    Your answers to William T. helped me. After two years plus months of investigation of Trumps actions, I had a hard time understanding how ANYONE could believe Hillary was used as a political pawn and Trump was the totally corrupt winner. William did present his case very well but it did lack facts that support the case that Trump was being spied upon plus other illegal actions were done to him and his team and Hillary was given special treatment from government officials. Thank God Trump won so the American people are now aware of the corruption going on with people we trusted to take care of us. Thanks for sharing.

  • Sam L Kemp

    05/29/2019 09:54 AM

    Excellent response Laura! If the left would merely be as rational as this exchange, we could likely get somewhere!

  • Alice Claar

    05/29/2019 09:18 AM

    Thank you, thank you for all you do to help the people. You and Mike help us understand things we would have no way of knowing. Thanks for helping make America Great again. God Bless you and all your family.

  • Jim Steding

    05/29/2019 08:58 AM

    Nice job Laura!

  • Kevin J Cook

    05/29/2019 08:37 AM

    Governor you did a great job in responding and being polite. The fact that you had to re-explain the obvious is what is concerning about most Democrats. They cannot see the reality of the daemonic party they are part of and how easily they are being deceived by wicked people like the Clintons call me Lynch Hussein Obama etc. I pray every day that God helps these people to become woke