In a world full of fake news, we on the HUCKABEE team are dismayed on the very rare occasions when we hear we might possibly have trafficked in it, however inadvertently. But then our dismay fades away when we find out we really were on the right track after all. This is one of those occasions.

A reader named Dobbin C. wrote to say, “Governor, you are really disappointing me. You continue to promulgate the fake news about the testing on beagles. You cannot in good conscience criticize the other side by sensationalizing fake news when you are doing it, too.”

Dobbin likely read the “fact”-check by POLITIFACT that rated the claim that Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) was funding certain cruel beagle studies “mostly false.” Guess it’s time to fact-check the “fact”-checkers again.

First, let’s go back to what we actually said: that it had been “reported” that while Dr. Fauci was running the NIAID, it gave $400,000 to fund the cruel experiments involving beagles and sandflies, and that some people were very upset about it. Here’s the quote from the morning newsletter for October 27: “Dr. Anthony Fauci is facing bipartisan fury and the hashtag @ArrestFauci is trending after it was reported that under his leadership, the NIH gave $400,000 in funding for medical experiments in which beagle puppies endured months of horrific, torturous treatment, then were killed.”

This is true. We did not engage in “sensationalizing” this story. We did not accuse Dr. Fauci of personally signing off on these experiments, as many probably did, nor did we even imply it. We didn’t even claim that the NIAID had funded these experiments, only that reports of it were making people mad. What we said was true.

Here is the story we linked to from FOX NEWS. They handled the story correctly as well, referring to “allegations” against the doctor and the Institute.

I do like that they also included this link to another Fauci story, though.

We linked to a list of other cruel animal studies that to our knowledge the “fact”-checkers have not addressed, and also to a related and correct story about PETA calling on Dr. Fauci to resign. This is true; they have. Again, we never accused Dr. Fauci or the NIAID of funding these studies.

Now, let’s look at what POLITIFACT said to refute the story. They reported that NIAID said it “did not fund one of the studies.” (“ONE OF” the studies?) Apparently that study was the one from the photograph that has been widely circulated, the one from Tunisia of the two anesthetized beagles with their heads enclosed so sandflies could eat them. (I’ms so sorry even to have to talk about something this disturbing, but that’s what it was.) However, there were two other studies –- one of which also involved the cutting of the dogs’ vocal cords and euthanizing them at the end –- that they say they DID fund. So we would say that POLITIFACT is really splitting hairs here.

According to POLITIFACT, “the NIAID said all animals used in NIH-funded research are protected by laws, regulations and policies that were followed in these studies.”

POLITIFACT goes on to quote some of the more sensationalized tweets about Dr. Fauci, terrible names he was called, etc. Again, we did not engage in any of that. They mention inaccuracies in “some reports and social media postings.” That wouldn’t be us, either.

While we were looking into this, we found something very interesting about dogs used in American medical research and are including it to provide some interesting historical perspective on the cruel beagle studies currently in the news. American tax dollars have apparently been funding extremely cruel experiments on dogs, particularly beagles, for a very long time. Researchers find that the beagle is a breed particularly suited to experimentation because of "its size and long life."

There's even such a thing as the "Beagle Data Congress," where in 2010, researchers discussed their “Beagle Dog Experiments” researching the effects of atomic radiation. An earlier project called "the Argonne Beagle Dog Experiments" was carried out on 5,000 very unlucky beagles from 1952 to 1991 and supported by grants from the Atomic Energy Commission. There were 15 "unique" (and uniquely horrifying) studies that involved blasting beagles with radiation and documenting the effects.

For example, 295 beagles were subjected to "continuous external co-60 gamma-ray exposure continued until death." Another study was called "Leukemogenesis: duration-of-life gamma irradiation of young adult beagles." And 298 beagles were given "gamma ray exposure during pregnancy," to learn the effects of radiation on the developing puppies. Good grief.

Poor Snoopy.

Here's more information on the Argonne National Laboratory. If you thought this place was in France, you were wrong. It's in Argonne, Illinois. It’s an American lab with, as far as we can tell, American funding.

So when the NIAID says the dogs in their experiments are “protected by laws, regulations and policies that were followed in these studies,” what does that even mean? That it’s “policy” to cut dogs’ vocal cords when their cries of pain are too loud? Because that’s what they did. It’s time for their “policies” to change.

Anyway, we stand by everything we’ve had to say on this, and we actually appreciate the letter from Dobbin, misguided as it was, as it gave us an opportunity to clarify and update the actual story: Yes, the AIAID has had to admit that it does fund cruel research studies on dogs, just not the one in the picture.

Election Day for the Virginia gubernatorial race, and for other down-ballot votes as well, is this coming Tuesday, November 2, and the stakes could hardly be higher –- or the choice clearer. Earlier in the week, our commentary on the lurking presence in Virginia of DNC lawyer/activist and infamous election manipulator Marc Elias drew quite a bit of reader response.

You know, it’s impossible for me to respond to every letter --- even though they’re all read --- but now and then it’s instructive to respond to a particular letter for a particular reason. That’s the case with the following letter from Carol, because of one thing she said about the election that really stood out and makes a timely response critical before Election Day. Read her letter and see if you can pick out the part I mean. Then I’ll explain what the very important issue is.

From Carol (with slight editing):

I am in Georgia. Wherever Stacey Abrams goes, the laws are broken. This is what she advocated and got done in Georgia for the 2020 election. She is in Virginia now and the [requirement for the] last four digits of [a voter’s] Social Security number has been deleted even though it is the law there.

This is how it is done and how the election was stolen in 2020, and unless it is stopped, 2022 and 2024 will go the way of 2020. They only win by changing the laws to suit their outcome. Many understand this and will not vote because they say and believe it is rigged. Even the Supreme Court are cowards in taking up the suits that would have proven that.

...Keep America sick and mail-in ballots will again be the next way votes are stolen and elections rigged.

From the Gov:

Thank you for writing, Carol. Yes, we discussed some of the recent changes to the voting laws in Virginia --- also the fact that it’s illegal for the government to ignore laws it doesn’t want to enforce. Marc Elias and Stacey Abrams make quite a team, don’t they?

Another good point is that as long as state and county officials can use COVID-19 as an excuse for mass mail-in voting, cheating will be easy and largely undetectable. And their hope is that we’ll get so used to the convenience of just mailing in our ballots, most people will prefer that whether COVID is still a major concern or not. But we need to do what the French did in 1975 after seeing the fraud caused by mail-in voting: scrap it except on a limited basis, by request when people have a legitimate reason for not being able to get to the polls. That will not happen in battleground states until they’re run by people who don’t want to keep their thumb on the election scales. Those people must be voted out.

That brings me to the part of the letter that has to be addressed. Did you guess it? “MANY...WILL NOT VOTE BECAUSE THEY...BELIEVE THE VOTE IS RIGGED.”

If enough Republicans stay home to make the margin of victory, say, 300 votes instead of 30,000, how much easier have we made it for Democrats to cheat? Cheaters love close races; it’s much harder to see big statistical anomalies and much easier to “find” the relatively small number of votes they need. It’s clear this is what happened in Georgia’s last senatorial election; fed-up Republicans stayed home and let their opponents just take it. We blew our chance to temper the Biden administration with a Republican-led Senate just because some Republicans sat on their hands.

Conversely, it might seem impossible to stop cheaters, but one way to do it is to turn out in such large numbers that they can’t make up the difference with fake votes. It has to be a blowout.

Anyone thinking of sitting out this or any other Election Day had better realize: you are doing exactly what the opposition wants you to. They want you to give up, to resign yourself to the fate they are choosing for you. Don’t do it. Instead, do the opposite of what they want.

It’s kind of a catch: in order to fix the cheating, we have to win in spite of the cheating! I know that seems overwhelming, but if conservative turnout is high enough, it will happen. (I would think that this time, all the justifiably angry parents in Virginia could really make the difference.) Once we’re in, then we work state-by-state to reform the system. Yes, Democrats will fight us every step of the way, so, as I said in speaking of Marc Elias, our lawyers have to be better than their lawyers. And they have to be everywhere.

But polls show conclusively that most Americans want accurate and honest elections. As Jason Snead, executive director of the Honest Elections Project, said, “Voters want it to be easy to vote, but also hard to cheat.” It has become ridiculously easy to vote, and easy to cheat, too. Half the country has lost faith in our elections. If that half of the country stays home on Election Day, the other half wins by default.

As Mollie Hemingway says in RIGGED, “The left’s path to future victory requires it to cow its opposition into silence...A growing number of Americans are outraged by the way the left seizes and deploys power. They are sick of the lies, manipulation, and distortion that a corrupt ruling class spins on a regular basis. Those courageous citizens, not the decaying establishment, will determine the fate of the nation.”

Carol, I want to thank you for writing, because you reminded me, however inadvertently, of something I'd really wanted to mention before Tuesday’s election. Virginians, no matter how you feel about what the left has done to corrupt the system, it is critical that you turn out and vote! Get everyone you know to the polls. Start the red wave.

I’ll close with some good news from John Solomon on the election reform front. In the wake of the Maricopa County audit report –- which was quite bad despite the media’s sugar-coat –- the demand for 2020 forensic audits in all 50 states is gaining support, now up to 38 states, with 150 state legislators signing an open letter to that effect. (Note: I think they’d have more participation if they didn’t call for decertifications as well; the emphasis needs to be on forensic analysis and reform of the system for future elections.) Here’s an excerpt:

“In addition to Arizona, sworn affidavits have accumulated from many states detailing rampant corruption and mismanagement in the election process...We have come to the conclusion that all 50 states need to be forensically audited. Voter rolls should be scrubbed with a canvass of the voters to ensure future integrity of our elections...We call on each state to decertify its electors where it has been shown the elections were certified prematurely and inaccurately.”

In fact, a problematic audit report in Wisconsin has prompted the state senate to launch its own investigation of the 2020 election in that state.

Who thinks Nancy Pelosi’s “9/11-style commission” to investigate what happened on Capitol Hill last January 6 is actually there to fact-find? Me, neither. But I’ll tell you who's doing some first-rate investigation and reporting on the security breach at the Capitol building, and it’s not congressional Democrats or this administration’s Department of “Justice.”

It’s REVOLVER NEWS. But what they seem to be uncovering does not fit with the narrative Democrats want to maintain. In fact, it’s what they want to hide.

An Arizona man named Ray Epps, a Marine sergeant allegedly involved in the group the Oath Keepers, clearly was acting as a provocateur the evening before the rally. According to the REVOLVER report, “...Epps was insistent that everyone stay focused on a common mission: storming the Capitol. On multiple livestreams, Epps moves from group to group throughout the plaza barging in and insisting everyone ‘stay focused’ on ‘what we’re here for’ --- which he would then explain meant going inside the U.S. Capitol building. When asked to give a reason for his crazy plot, Epps would continually fall back on his catch-all rationale: ‘It’s about the Constitution.’” People in a couple of the groups he gave his little pep talk to even suggested that he might be “a Fed.”

You’d think that if the FBI were rounding up suspects to hold them for many months without bail, essentially as political prisoners, one person very close to the top of their list, if not THE top, would be this guy. But no. They had him on their “most wanted” list for a while, but when REVOLVER NEWS came out with their first big story, he was dropped off the list.

Not only did the FBI do that, but the day after REVOLVER ran another story on Stuart Rhodes, also of the Oath Keepers, they scrubbed Epps’ face from their database. Rhodes, like Epps, remains unindicted to this day, while others who might have just walked into the Capitol Building to take a selfie are languishing in solitary, some reportedly unable even to talk with their attorneys.

The videos of Epps, seen pretty widely on Twitter, show him talking with Trump supporters the evening of January 5, repeatedly encouraging them to enter the Capitol Building the day of the rally. He’s saying in a voice that cuts through the background noise, “I don’t even like to say it because I’ll be arrested. I’ll say it. We need to go into the Capitol.”

And now, the irony is that Epps seems to be one of relatively few people identified as having been involved in the security breach who WEREN’T arrested. But also unindicted are people who worked with him the day of the rally to, in the words of the REVOLVER team, “carry out a breach of the police barricades that induced a subsequent flood of unsuspecting MAGA protesters to unwittingly trespass on Capitol restricted grounds and place themselves in legal jeopardy.”

To give a little perspective, Epps was not even arrested, while another Oath Keeper, a Green Beret veteran named Jeremy Brown, is even now behind bars, bail denied until trial, simply for standing 100 feet too close to the Capitol steps. It hardly seems possible that the government isn’t protecting Epps.

Republican Rep. Thomas Massie asked Attorney General Merrick Garland about Epps’ activities during Garland’s recent hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, playing some of the video for him of Epps talking up the idea of going inside the Capitol. Unfortunately, it was played on a very small screen that Rep, Massie was holding, but the audio of Epps telling people they need to go inside the Capitol the next day is unmistakable.

Massie informed Garland that the same person who was doing this the night before the rally was actually directing people to the Capitol during the rally. Then he asked Garland if he –- after “one of the most sweeping investigations in history,” as Garland had called it –- had seen this video. Garland avoided the question with the old “we don’t comment on pending investigations” dodge. His deflection did have an extra dash of creativity, though, with Garland also saying it’s one of the “norms” of the Justice Department not to comment on “particular scenes or particular individuals.”

“I was hoping today to give you an opportunity to put to rest the concerns that people have that there were federal agents or assets of the federal government present on January 5 and January 6,” Massie said to Garland. “Can you tell us without talking about particular videos how many agents or assets of the government were present on January 6? Whether they agitated to go into the Capitol? And if any of them did?”

Garland would not address this at all. “I’m not going to violate this norm of the rule of law,” he said. “I’m not going to comment on investigation that’s ongoing.”

If Garland had wanted to allay Republicans’ concerns that the feds might have actively encouraged Trump supporters to breach the Capitol building, this would have been the perfect time to do it, with a denial. On the other hand, if Epps and others actually were working undercover as agents to make sure the “insurrection” happened, the excuse Garland cited would be a very convenient “norm” indeed.

For when you have time, REVOLVER NEWS has put together an amazing piece of investigative journalism. It’s quite long and detailed, but highly recommended. (If it’s too exhaustive, at least skip down to the conclusion.) I’ll just tell you that Ray Epps is not the only one who played an extremely active role in the breach but was mysteriously never arrested. To cite another striking example, another Marine veteran, still unidentified but called “MaroonPB,” was going around using the same “It’s about the Constitution” line as Epps did. He also removed barricades and entered Senate offices during the breach itself, armed with bear mace. No arrest for him. Not even an identification, though he is maskless and beautifully photographed, in such a way that shows off his distinctive knuckle tattoos.

The team at REVOLVER NEWS say they're just getting started. Look at everything they’ve uncovered so far, and it suggests the FBI has a way of actually becoming the thing it purportedly hates. In this case, it might even have caused, or helped cause, the Trump “insurrection” narrative needed so desperately by leftists to prime Trump for impeachment #2 and tar his supporters as "domestic terrorists." (Note: that does NOT excuse the Trump supporters who got swept into it and caused incalculable damage to the conservative cause.) We know the FBI helped fake the Russia Hoax; who knows what else they might have faked?