BY MIKE HUCKABEE
Blessings on you and your family from all the Huckabee team! Thank you for subscribing!
Robert Kennedy’s campaign cleans up his abortion answer
I’m sorry to see Robert F. Kennedy Jr. caving to the Democrats’ radical “abortion to the moment of birth” wing. Sunday in Iowa, he told an NBC reporter, “The decision to abort a child should be up to the women during the first three months of life.” Asked if he would cap abortion after three months, he said, “Yes, three months. Once a child is viable outside the womb, I think then the state has an interest in protecting the child. I’m for medical freedom. Individuals ought to be able to make their own choices. I think the states have a right to protect a child once the child becomes viable, and that right, it increases. And I think there’s very, very few abortions that are performed after that period of time anyway.”
But following the predictable howls of outrage, his campaign rushed out this statement:
“Mr. Kennedy misunderstood a question posed to him by a NBC reporter in a crowded, noisy exhibit hall at the Iowa State Fair. Mr. Kennedy’s position on abortion is that it is always the woman’s right to choose. He does not support legislation banning abortion.”
So he didn’t hear the question? Look at his answer above and tell me what you think he thought the question was if it wasn’t that. I think he heard the question fine, he just heard the shrieking from the left even louder.
Not going to happen, but…
Unfortunately, this will never get past the Senate, but some House Republicans sponsored a bill to eliminate special council Jack Smith’s salary due to his history of failed, politically partisan prosecutions. It deserves recognition if for no other reason than the bill’s title: It’s the “Yanking Outlays for an Unethical, Ruthless Enterprise that Fraudulently Impedes Robust Electoral Debate Act” or the “YOURE FIRED Act.”
Ukraine vs Hawaii
Apparently, brushing off questions about Maui wildfire victims with a terse “No comment” and returning to his beach vacation didn’t do enough to cement President Biden’s reputation as “Mr. Compassion.” So on Monday, Biden announced that the government will offer a “one-time” relief payment of a whopping $700 to Americans on Maui. On the same day, he announced plans to send another $200 million to Ukraine,
Couldn’t he at least ask Hunter to make a phone call to China and pick up a few million for Maui?
Welcome to Reality 1.01:
Liberal activists in San Diego are stunned and confused to discover that when you stop tolerating letting homeless people take over your city, pitch tents and live anywhere they want, they stop doing it.
No Huckabee Newsletter
Government and Big Tech working together to censor conservative views, is a big reason why we changed things up and moved my newsletter to Substack.
Because you are a free subscriber to my newsletter, I would like you to consider subscribing to the paid version on Substack.
A Substack subscription-based newsletter allows my team and I to focus on what matters: the writing and the research we do to back up the writing, instead of worrying about censorship, or what Google is saying about me, how they are handling advertising on our website or whether or not my work shows up when you search for it.
To keep the newsletter going, we have setup a monthly goal of identifying 600 new paying subscribers for the month of August and we have 345 to go.
If you can afford to do so, please subscribe here:
To become a paid subscriber of my politics newsletter it is $5 monthly or $36 annually. I email daily and my politics newsletters usually take 10-15 minutes to read. I cover the news of the day and the liberal media. I write about the upcoming elections and dive deep on the Biden scandals. I will also share my opinion of the Trump indictment. I don’t think you will regret reading my newsletter regularly, so please consider subscribing today.
A Catch-22 is always frustrating, but when it interferes with parents protecting their children, it goes far beyond that. Monday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled 2 to 1 to dismiss a case brought by three parents against the Montgomery County, Maryland, public school district over its policy of keeping students’ “gender transitions” secret from their parents. The courts claimed that since these parents didn’t allege that their children are transgender or struggling with their gender identity, they didn’t have “standing” to challenge the policy.
Hold on: if the policy is to keep the gender confusion of children secret from their parents, how could the parents even know that their children are or aren’t experiencing it? Seems like the sort of thing that it would be important for parents to know, but SOMEBODY is keeping them in the dark about it. Too bad nobody is doing anything about that. Oh wait: these parents ARE! Or at least they're trying to.
I wish them good luck with an appeal, and it’s also long past time that we start seriously discussing reform of the “standing” issue, which has become an easy out for judges who want to dodge their responsibility of having to make controversial decisions.
John Hinderaker is a Harvard-educated legal expert with 41 years’ experience as a litigator in 100 jury trials in 19 states. He’s also the president of the Center for the American Experiment, an author, legal commentator and founder of the Power Line blog. He’s now had a chance to read the wildly creative Georgia indictment of Trump and his associates, and he’s written his reaction in an article with the familiar title of “I Read the Georgia Indictment So You Don’t Have To.”
It’s well worth reading in its entirety, but in a nutshell: He’s baffled by what the accused did that’s supposed to be illegal. He says there are only two small sections of the indictment that allege actual crimes, neither of which involves Trump, while everything else alleged is perfectly legal. He notes, “You can’t aggregate a series of legal acts and make them a crime by calling them a conspiracy.”
Travel with Mike Huckabee to Israel:
Learn more here: The Israel Experience (thegreatesttrip.com)
Most Ethical Administration Ever:
The leaders of 14 government watchdog groups sent a letter to President Biden calling for the immediate resignation of his Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm, citing “numerous instances of unethical conduct throughout her tenure.” Really, only one letter?
The Babylon Bee perfectly predicted what the Administration’s response would likely be:
Radicals at Rutgers
You might have heard of Brittney Cooper, who is a radical professor at Rutgers University. She’s infamous for declaring that all white people are racist villains and “mother(bleep)s” who need to be “taken out.” This and other comments sparked a Change.org petition for the university to fire her for her “racist, hateful, dehumanizing, and inadmissible behavior and rhetoric” (which really shouldn’t require a petition.)
Cooper has now raised eyebrows by claiming that only white people have ever been slavers: “…White human beings thought there’s a world here and we own it. Prior to them, black and brown people have been sailing across oceans, interacting with each other for centuries without total subjugation, domination and colonialism, right?”
Well…no. Wrong. Incredibly wrong. At the link below, Islamic history expert and author Raymond Ibrahim provides us with something that Professor Cooper has apparently never had before: a history lesson. One that reminds us of the ancient, cross-cultural history of slavery and violent subjugation, from Native American tribes of America to the Muslim invasion of Spain to contemporary Africa, where slavery continues even today.
FYI: Sending your kid to the New Brunswick campus of Rutgers, where Cooper is employed, will cost you $31,954 a year. Why in the world would you pay that to have them radicalized and miseducated?
Related: From our “Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations” Desk comes this story about a Princeton University “anti-capitalism” class that teaches students that black people are so oppressed by systemic racism that they should be considered disabled.
Here’s just one sentence of wacko leftist gobbledygook from the course description:
"Re-orienting healing as a decolonizing process enables students to re-politicize personal trauma as it intersects with global legacies of violence, war, racism, slavery, patriarchy, colonialism, orientalism, homophobia, ableism, capitalism, and extractivism."
Tuition, room and board for a year at Princeton will cost you $83,140. That seems like a lot to teach your kid to be a condescending, America-hating racist and anti-capitalist. If the administrators at Princeton really were anti-capitalists, they wouldn’t be overcharging so much for their worthless degrees.
LATE NIGHT COMEDY DEAD, LONG LIVE JAY LENO
By “Huckabee” pop culture guru Pat Reeder (http://www.hollywoodhifi.com)
With the writers’ and actors’ strike now well into month four, those few who still watched the late night “comedy” shows from lingering force of habit have mostly lost the habit. Ratings for everyone but “Gutfeld” (who is not affected and not in reruns) have tanked, and they were already a shadow of what they used to be. The networks made a decision to drop the Johnny Carson style of appealing to all Americans with good-natured, nonpartisan humor and chase the young leftist market. That was the beginning of the end (as Danny DeVito said in “Other People’s Money,” the surest way to go bankrupt is to keep getting a bigger share of an ever-shrinking market.) Now, many TV critics suspect the strikes have finished off the format for good and even post-strike, it will never recover.
How much have these shows shriveled away? Snopes.com actually felt the need to do a fact-check on the claim that they were in reruns due to the strike. You’d think viewers would know that (or maybe not, since they’ve been doing the same Trump jokes for six years), but apparently, nobody could be bothered even to tune in and check.
Warning: That link includes a YouTube clip of Stephen Colbert talking about the strike. It’s exactly what you would expect: a pro-union speech followed by a strike-related “comedy” bit (“News of the Future”) that’s nothing but witless partisan pandering designed to make the studio audience clap rather than laugh. The writers stole an old “Laugh-In” bit, made it divisive and unfunny, and think they deserve a raise. And they wonder why nobody misses them.
Viewing Tip: Did you know that YouTube has a number of compilations of Jay Leno’s “Headlines” bits from when “The Tonight Show” was funny? Laura and I have been watching some of those, and it’s a revelation. Not mean-spirited, partisan, political or divisive, just laugh-out-loud funny. This is what late night comedy used to be like before it was infected with Comedy Central’s “smug leftist lecture” disease.
If you’d like to be reminded, here’s a link to just one of the “Headlines” compilations from the year 2000 alone. I should caution you that it’s nearly four hours long and might prove addictive.
And after you work through all the years of Headlines, here’s a playlist of the “99 Cent Store” bits. You’re welcome.
More stunning conflicts of interest in Trump and Biden cases
The conflicts of interest in both the Trump and Hunter Biden cases grow more stunning every day.
Believe it or not, it was THE NEW YORK TIMES that reported this: that the young judge just assigned to the Georgia Trump case once worked for Fani Willis, the Fulton County DA who is bringing the charges.
Law professor Jonathan Turley said Wednesday evening that he was prepared to give this young, relatively inexperienced judge the benefit of the doubt. The key to these cases, he told Laura Ingraham, is the “essence” of the judge, “as opposed to the extent of their experience.” In other words, you want someone who’s going to listen to both sides and be fair, “to understand this is a historical moment” that calls for an assurance to both sides that this is going to be a fair trial.
This is always a concern, he said, with state judges who are elected. “Being viewed as in any way helpful to Donald Trump in Atlanta is not a way to get re-elected,” he said. (Before continuing, let’s pause to consider the implications of that last observation --- what it tells us about the state of ‘justice’ in the United States…………..)
Turley says it’s going to take “a great deal of integrity and courage” from this judge to do this the right way “even if it’s taken the wrong way by many people who will be voting in the judicial election.” He might have to stand up to “his people” and say that getting re-elected isn’t worth doing the wrong thing. (This is a bit reminiscent of Mark Twain’s Huck Finn, threatened with hell if he doesn’t turn in a slave and deciding, “All right then, I’ll go to hell.”)
As for Willis’ goal of starting the trial on March 4 --- which just happens to be the day before the Super Tuesday primaries --- “it’s clearly going to run into problems,” according to Turley. “This schedule is really grossly unfair to Donald Trump.” This is, he says, a “massive production” with 19 people on trial,” and he outlines the complications and constitutional questions that would have to be raised. “The question is, why this mad rush? Why is everyone not just piling on indictments, but jamming together these trials, daisy-chaining them, from Super Tuesday to virtually the inauguration, if you count the civil cases as well?”
The answer to these questions should be obvious.
“At some point judges are going to have to step in,” he says, “and be a mature voice, and say, ‘Look, okay, STOP IT. I mean, this guy has got to prepare a defense in multiple cases; you’re not the first prosecutor to file, and, get in line.” But of course, that would interfere with Trump’s opponents’ relentless carpet-bombing of him before the election.
Ingraham asked Turley about something we mentioned yesterday: “co-conspirator” Mark Meadows’ call for the case to be moved from state to federal court, given that special counsel Jack Smith has already filed similar charges in federal court. Turley believes it is possible “because we’re living in uncertain and interesting times” and “there are issues here that President Trump will raise.” Many actions and conversations occurred while Trump was still President and different considerations applied. “In some ways,” he says, “Willis may have really tripped the wire here. You know, I call this sort of the Jackson Pollack school of prosecution --- she threw EVERYTHING against the canvas and looked to see if a picture emerged.”
By making everything part of the conspiracy, he explains, “she also tripped wires with regards to his time as President, and that has created this question of whether it can be removed.”
In his latest column, Turley explains why “the Willis indictment is a serious threat to Trump but also to our system of democratic process.” To those obsessed with getting Trump, that doesn’t even seem to matter.
We love the suggestion by J. D. Rucker that Trump and the other 18 “co-conspirators” in the Georgia case should sue DA Fani Willis for malicious criminal prosecution. It’s right there in the Georgia Code…
If this isn’t “abusive litigation,” as phrased in the code, I don’t know what is. What makes the indictment of Trump “malicious” is the timing of it, which under legitimate circumstances would have come a couple of years ago. The only reason to wait till now would be to inflict the most massive amount of damage possible on Trump’s presidential campaign.
Rucker advises the Trump defense team to jump on this soon and make the case that Willis and the state “targeted Trump at this specific time to upend his presidential campaign just ahead of primary season.” He thinks Trump might win that case, and “deliver real consequences to the corrupt District Attorney.” Now THAT would be some justice...
RELATED: With so much in the news about the defiling of the “justice” system in Georgia by a DA determined to take Trump down at any cost, it would’ve been easy to overlook something outrageous Hunter’s attorneys did in the courtroom of Judge Maryellen Noreika.
Hunter’s team actually said that federal prosecutors had “reneged” on an agreed-upon plea deal that we now know even included a clause about “future immunity.” They said they signed the agreement in court last month and intend to abide by it. It doesn’t seem to matter that the judge later brought up areas of apparent disagreement that resulted in those very attorneys saying the deal was dead.
Attorneys Chris Clark and Abbe Lowell responded to the government’s motion to scrap the entire deal by accusing Special Counsel Weiss of reneging on “the previously agreed-upon plea agreement.” The part of the deal that included the gun diversion agreement --- which was also the part that included the broad grant of immunity for any possible crimes that have been investigated (!) --- had been signed by prosecutors, they said, and was therefore “binding” and “still in effect.” By “possible crimes,” they’re talking about such charges as FARA violations; that is to say, failure to register as an agent of a foreign entity. Anyone who thinks this is not a big deal should ask Paul Manafort. (Important side note: we know that if Hunter violated FARA, the case can be made that his father did, too.)
It’s really quite hilarious to see the DOJ and Hunter’s attorneys arguing about this now. It seems like only yesterday they were like peas in a pod.
Guy Benson at TOWNHALL has more details and also makes some great points about the appointment of David Weiss (of all people!) as special counsel, “the same guy who’s fashioned the most favorable legal and political outcomes imaginable for the Bidens, given the facts with which he’s been presented.”
Kurt Schlichter on why it might be Trump’s best strategy to skip the upcoming GOP primary debate.
The official death toll from the devastating fires in Maui has reached 110, but it’s feared it may go much higher. Former Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard says that the government response on all levels has been insufficient and aid to victims is almost all on the community level.
If you’d like to help with that private response, Samaritan’s Purse is coordinating with churches to bring immediate aid to victims who’ve lost everything. You can make a donation at http://www.samaritanspurse.org.
And for a dramatic firsthand account of what it was like as the enormity of the danger slowly dawned on everyone, check out this report by a Breitbart reporter who happened to be on vacation in Maui when the fires started spreading.
Trump’s Georgia trial date
If you’re going to try to claim that your transparently ridiculous racketeering case against your party’s leading political opponent isn’t motivated by election interference, maybe don’t ask for a trial date that’s literally the day before Super Tuesday. I guess the Democrats figure they’ve gone so full-on banana republic that they don’t even have to pretend to hide their real motivations anymore.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY:
Thank you for reading my newsletter.
For more news, visit my website.