Mike Huckabee

There seems to be no bottom for President Biden’s poll numbers, with even his base now crumbling under him like a California house during a mudslide. A new Quinnipiac poll found that he’s now losing his most loyal constituency, black voters. His approval with them has dropped 14 points since April and is now at 49%, below the majority level for the first time.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/06/08/poll-only-49-percent-of-black-voters-approve-of-bidens-job-performance-down-14-points-since-april/

With whites, his approval is down to 32% with 60% disapproving, and worst of all is his approval rating with Hispanics: 24%. This is being chalked up to the toll taken on working people by rampant inflation, record gas prices and out-of-control crime in blue cities.

That dismal approval number among Hispanics, and the growing number of Hispanic voters turning Republican, likely explains this story:

In a move that critics say “reeks of desperation,” a group of Hispanic investors with financial backing from leftist billionaire George Soros (the same man who bankrolled the DA’s who created that out-of-control crime) has purchased 18 Spanish language radio stations across 10 cities. They plan to use them to counter conservative Spanish stations, which the group’s founders, former Obama staffer Stephanie Valencia and Obama and Hillary Clinton campaign veteran Jess Morales Rocketto, accuse of spreading “misinformation.” Like what, that inflation is rampant, gas prices are at record highs and crime is out of control? Or just "misinformation" under the current definition: "true stuff I don't want anyone to talk about."

https://www.foxnews.com/media/george-soros-hispanic-radio-stations-reeks-desperation

They must not have much faith in the intelligence of Hispanic Americans to believe they can be convinced to ignore what they see with their own eyes and are living through every day. Hispanics are only too familiar with nations where monopoly media outlets pump out 24/7 leftist propaganda. But even in a nation as isolated as Cuba, the people are smart enough to know that they’re being lied to.

FYI: the group is called the “Latino Media Network” (not “Latinx?”), so if you hear that name or the initials “LMN,” you’ll know what you’re dealing with. Just think of LMN as standing for “Lies Mean Nothing.”

Mike Huckabee

Stephen Kruiser at PJ Media has some brutally funny comments about the January 6th Committee Good Time Variety Hour and its openly-admitted purpose: to try to distract Americans from the real problems they’re dealing with and keep Democrats in power in November so they can keep creating more of them.

https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2022/06/08/the-morning-briefing-karma-will-not-be-kind-to-the-j6-kangaroo-court-commies-n1603965

By the way, I know how expensive it is to produce a TV show, so let me save them some money by telling the real root cause of the January 6th riots: it’s the pathological, psychotic Trump Derangement Syndrome of Nancy Pelosi and Washington, DC, Mayor Muriel Bowser.

Knowing there would be a large partisan crowd, Trump offered 20,000 National Guard troops to insure safety and order. And without even thinking about what would be wise or prudent, they not only refused the help, they attacked Trump for offering it, because that was their response to everything he had done ever since he dared to deny Hillary Clinton her ordained coronation as President. So they could never, ever work with him on anything. If Trump was for it, it must be BAD!

That’s why we no longer have border security, energy independence or a foreign policy that prioritizes American interests, and why they’re trying to undo a tax cut that helped 80% of Americans. Because Trump IS THE DEVIL!! It’s the kind of mindless, psychotic obsession that we used to treat by putting people into psychiatric institutions, not the institutions of government.

So if you really care about these people, in November, please, take pity and remove them from the place where their obsession is allowed to foment and send them home, where they can finally get the mental health treatment they so desperately need.

Mike Huckabee

From Huckabee reader Margaret K, on Substack:

I trust Mike Huckabee's team, as I don't have the wherewithal to watch 2 hours of political theatre interspersed with leftwing commentary by network "political experts."

From Rick, also on Substack:

Once again, Thank You! I pretty well abide by your suggestion to let you follow the news and keep us informed. It helps!

………………….

Thanks, readers! Of course, you’ll have to try hard to avoid seeing Thursday’s primetime telecast of Nancy Pelosi’s January 6 committee hearings.

We call it “The January 6 Propaganda Machine Good-Time Show.” But this completely one-sided anti-Trump extravaganza, produced by former ABC president and news producer James Goldston, will run on ABC as “Attack on the Capitol: The Investigation.” On NBC, the simultaneous coverage is billed as “NBC News Special: The January 6 Hearings.” On CBS, it’s “CBS News: Capitol Assault Hearings.” On MSNBC, it’s “The January 6^th Hearings: The House Investigates.” At CNN, they’re more dramatic, calling it “Attack on Democracy: The January 6^th Hearings.” On FOX BUSINESS NEWS (yes, they’re running it), it’s simply called “January 6^th Committee Hearing.”

The propaganda machine is wall to wall.

I wonder if this being shoved down our throats has anything to do with the American people gradually coming to see this was not Trump’s fault. According to an NBC poll taken in May, a minority now hold him mostly responsible. Panicked Democrats have to do something about this right away, as January 6 is all they have.

https://cloudflarepoc.newsmax.com/newsfront/capitol-riot-january-6-committee-public-hearing/2022/06/06/id/1073183/

So they’ve brought in the big dogs, propaganda-wise, in what must be the biggest in-kind contribution to Democrats in political history. And Thursday is only the beginning –- this is really about the next election, and the next. As reported by NBC San Diego, “The hearings are expected to be exhaustive but not the final word from the committee. It plans to release subsequent reports on its findings, including recommendations on legislative reforms, ahead of the midterm elections.”

But New York GOP Rep. Elise Stefanik of the House Judiciary Committee said Wednesday that the GOP would be “all over the airwaves, setting the record straight” with “a slew of events and media appearances” of their own.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house/all-over-airwaves-trump-aligned-republicans-ready-plan-to-drown-out-jan-6-hearings

The challenge, though, will be finding any of it. “All over the airwaves” –- that won’t be happening. And even with FBN showing Nancy's hearings, some Democrats have expressed rage that FOX News isn’t showing this propaganda, too. Nothing short of full compliance will satisfy them.

If you can stomach some leftist spin, this CNN opinion piece predicts the GOP counterprogramming “will fail.” I say that if it does, that will only be because the media have systematically shut it out.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/05/opinions/trump-january-6-committee-hearings-obeidallah/index.html

CNN thinks it’s “despicable” for Trump allies to try to be heard, even though, as ranking Judiciary Committee member Jim Jordan of Ohio has noted, Pelosi’s committee has set it up so there will be NO CROSS-EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES in her hearings. (Do you think Nancy’s hand-picked “Republicans,” Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, will do that? Get real.) This might be a first: completely one-sided hearings! Goodness, if legitimate legal proceedings didn’t allow for cross-examination, they really would be kangaroo courts. Imagine how the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard trial would’ve gone if no one had been able to cross-examine Amber Heard.

https://www.axios.com/2022/06/03/trump-january-6-hearings-republicans

Here’s one example of counterprogramming that NEWSMAX has already reported:

https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/marjorie-taylor-greene-jan-6-committee-hearing/2022/06/08/id/1073534/

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/06/08/democrat-star-jan-6-witness-someone-in-authority-left-the-door-open-at-capitol-mob-walked-in/

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6307489805112#sp=show-clips

As I often say, “we watch the news, so you don’t have to,” so you can count on us to keep an eye on the proceedings, though my writers tell me they’d much rather watch the re-run of YOUNG SHELDON that would normally be on CBS. We hope the ratings all tank, and that the only three people watching at all are us, because, well, we have to.

We’d also make the point that in the year-and-a-half since the protest, there have been numerous investigations and analyses that cause many to doubt even more the legitimacy of the election. We don’t have a definitive answer to that question yet, but it’s understandable why some people wanted to take a pause before certifying the vote. That’s all they wanted. If some got rowdy –- and yes, foolishly, some did –- it was out of frustration that the Justice Department was not hearing them and, arguably, not doing their job to SAFEGUARD “our democracy.”

To me, the big take-away from the incident is that if anything is a “threat to democracy,” it’s the growing suspicion that our election outcomes are fake. Anyone questioning those outcomes deserves not to be silenced but to receive proof that they haven’t been rigged. We got the opposite of that; we got the curtain slamming down.

What we’d like to see is Nancy and her winged monkeys very, very sorry in the end that they did this. And perhaps that will happen. Steve Bannon, who’s been charged with criminal contempt of Congress for not “cooperating,” has served subpoenas to Nancy herself and her nine committee members, plus Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Rep. Jim Clyburn, three staffers and the House general counsel, seeking documents relating to the decision to refer his case for a criminal trial. These would also include anything having to do with how the committee was set up in the first place. His trial is scheduled for July 18.

Some legal experts are saying that House members and staff will be shielded by the Speech and Debate Clause. That would be ironic, considering Bannon is refusing to cooperate because the President is supposed to be shielded by executive privilege. Details here.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10893701/Steve-Bannon-SUBPOENAS-Nancy-Pelosi-members-January-6-committee.html

Both Bannon and Peter Navarro hold that they don’t have to respond to subpoenas by an illegitimate committee. But now the DOJ is reportedly trying to make Navararo shut up about it.

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/doj-peter-navarro-order-indictment/2022/06/08/id/1073507/

Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs has a must-read piece explaining why he refuses to testify. “I have watched the Star Chamber proceedings...and have reached the conclusion that not only is it illegitimately formed, in violation of the rules of the House, it is manifestly organized for one purpose: a search and destroy mission against any and all perceived political enemies.

https://amgreatness.com/2022/06/08/why-i-refuse-to-testify-before-the-illegitimate-january-6-committee/

I’ll leave you with this definition, from Merriam-Webster:

KANGAROO COURT, noun

1) a mock court in which the principles of law and justice are disregarded or perverted

2) a court characterized by irresponsible, unauthorized, or irregular status or procedures

………………

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6307492022112#sp=show-clips

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/bidens-failed-disinformation-governance-board-making-plans-censor-americans-hold-opposing-views/

Mike Huckabee

In more late-breaking news, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, says whistleblowers within the FBI have told him the Bureau is retaliating against staffers who hold conservative views. They are reportedly purging their ranks of conservatives, particularly those who question their January 6 narrative.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/fbi-purging-conservatives-critics-january-6-narrative-whistleblowers-tell-gop-lawmaker

According to Jordan, a decorated Iraq war veteran was “being run out of the FBI” for daring to say something “that offended the FBI leadership about the January 6 investigation.” For disagreeing, he was indefinitely suspended without pay.

Another FBI official is being treated the same way because of an answer that person gave on an anonymous questionnaire to a question about January 6. It was something the leadership disagreed with, so that apparently is a career-ender.

Jordan says half a dozen from the FBI have come to his committee to tell their stories. Others have had their security clearances revoked after simply attending the Capitol Hill rally, even though they were far from the Capitol building and had nothing to do with the protest. Attending a Trump rally was enough.

As for the televised hearings, he said this was the only congressional committee hearing he’d ever seen in which there was no opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. “Because there’s no Republican on that committee who will do it,” he said. He explained that even when Adam Schiff had his private impeachment “bunker,” Jordan, as a member of the committee, could still be in that room and ask questions. But for this committee, Nancy Pelosi hand-picked every member, including the two anti-Trump “Republicans” --- that’s what makes it illegitimate --- and they can be counted on NOT to ask the questions that need to be asked.

Again, to hear anyone even dare to ask those questions, we’ll need to go over and listen to Elise Stefanik’s rebuttal. See you there.

Mike Huckabee

THE EVENING EDITION

BY MIKE HUCKABEE

Good evening! Blessings on you and your family and from all the Huckabee staff! Thank you for subscribing and I hope you enjoy today’s newsletter.

|READ AD-FREE ON SUBSTACK | SUBSCRIBE | CONTACT ME | 

New Court Ruling, but not the one you are waiting for

The Supreme Court is really dragging out the wait for a ruling possibly overturning Roe v. Wade. The Court released one decision Wednesday, but it was on an obscure case called Egbert v. Boule. While we continue to wait, you can read about that case here:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/06/08/supreme-court-rules-against-man-who-sued-federal-customs-police-use-force-bivins-smugglers-inn/7393307001/

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.”

John 16:33

If you have a favorite Bible Verse you want to see in one of our newsletters, please email [email protected]

Timely Reminder

A timely reminder to President Biden and other Democrats clamoring for more gun laws and gun confiscation: a major group that you’re talking about disarming is Black Americans who have been buying more guns recently to protect their families from the wave of violent crime set off by your leftist, pro-criminal policies and defunding of police. So why do you racists want to leave law-abiding Black Americans at the mercy of violent criminals?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-black-americans-are-buying-more-guns-ownership-laws-crime-violence-protection-11654635686

Here’s more on a growing demographic that Democrat gun control advocates want to pretend doesn’t exist: Black women gun owners. In short, the people who most need protection from the deadly consequences of Democrat policies in blue urban areas.

https://redstate.com/jenniferoo/2022/06/07/dont-tread-on-me-has-become-the-gun-toting-black-womans-credo-n575718

Keeping up with politics can be a real downer

Mike Huckabee

Good news: Congress is finally doing something to prevent a fertilizer shortage. They’re giving Adam Schiff a microphone.

Schiff is famous for producing more horse manure than the Kentucky Derby, and he’ll get another chance to demonstrate that skill on Thursday, when Democrats desperate for anything to save their seats will hold a prime time session of their illegitimate January 6^th Committee (I call it “illegitimate” because it is: its founding legislation required it to contain Republicans chosen by the House GOP leader; Nancy Pelosi rejected his choices and appointed her own, so it’s in violation of its own charter, its subpoenas should carry no weight; and it should be immediately disbanded.)

Democrats have abused their powers horrendously in trying to destroy their political opponents and innocent Trump supporters, and overcharged and persecuted even people who might actually be guilty of something. They’ve also spent a year and half bloviating about what a huge threat to “our democracy” that three-hour riot was (it was deplorable, but actually pretty short and relatively non-violent compared to the Democrats’ own “peaceful” riots.) They’ve tried to convince us it was the end of the world, like a toddler screaming that she’s going to DIIIIIIE from a paper cut.

I don’t know who they think will actually watch this primetime dog and donkey show, since most Americans have real problems of the Democrats’ own making to deal with and are way past caring about January 6^th. Like a TV series on its last legs that tries to rekindle interest by throwing in a wild new plot twist, Schiff is claiming to have a “great deal of new evidence” to show how close we came to “losing our democracy.” Quick, spread that on a wheat field!

https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2022/06/05/adam-schiff-claims-a-great-deal-of-new-evidence-exists-in-capitol-probe-n575181 

Does anyone seriously believe that a brag-tag mob was going to overthrow the federal government, or that Trump would have led a violent insurrection? Does anyone believe that Adam Schiff has any “new evidence?” If he did, he would’ve leaked it by now, since lying and leaking are his only two legislative talents. And where has this so-called “evidence” been all this time? In the same coat pocket with all that evidence he claimed to have of Trump officials colluding with Russia?

Or is this the kind of “new evidence” he’s talking about?

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/06/04/anonymous-gets-dropped-by-secret-service-after-spreading-january-6th-claim-n574848

It’s another fake news claim that the Secret Service feared Trump was about to turn against Vice President Pence and put him in physical danger. Notice how many of these accusations are about things they “feared Trump was going to do” that he never actually did? Even the head of the Secret Service under Biden shot down this latest imaginary tale, saying no threat against Pence was ever communicated to the Secret Service.  

The Republicans are planning a rapid response to all the Democrats’ ridiculous claims, but I question whether anyone will even be watching this garbage, other than CNN and MSNBC hosts and, unfortunately, me. The Democrats could better spend their time trying to fix some of the problems they’ve caused, but they either don’t know how or can’t admit that the damage was deliberate. Going whole hog on abusing their power to punish their political opponents is as dumb and short-sighted a move as killing the filibuster. As law Professor Jonathan Turley writes, they may soon be headed for a long stretch in the minority, and if Republicans follow the precedent they’ve set, it’s going to be a very uncomfortable stretch indeed.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/06/04/jonathan-turley-dems-may-be-ensuring-their-own-destruction-with-latest-moves-by-jan-6-cmte-n574748

Personally, I can’t wait to see what the Republican Committee to Investigate the Democrats’ January 6^th Committee turns up.

Mike Huckabee

Yesterday, we brought you the disgusting story of what was done to Trump economic and trade adviser Peter Navarro, leading into the week on which Democrats are pinning all their hopes and unrealistic dreams of holding back Republicans this fall: the hearings into January 6 being held by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s sham committee. If you do force yourself to watch any of that --- remember, “we watch the news, so you don’t have to" --- a lot of it will look familiar.

Who could forget the second impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, the one that took place when he was already headed out the door? The House impeachment managers went all-out, featuring a professionally produced video that heightened the drama of January 6 and exaggerated the violent “insurrection” that was going to destroy our democracy and take our country down by force! Never mind that it was really just a small group of desperately concerned but tragically misguided people who wanted the final vote to be checked out before the election was certified, and that there was not even ONE GUN among them. Some insurrection.

For the impeachment, video production was done not by a movie company, as was widely reported at the time, but by a firm called DOAR, which specializes in trial strategies, including "crafting visual presentations that aim to persuade juries."

https://news.yahoo.com/heres-made-chilling-video-montage-235331762.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

I condemned the behavior on January 6 at the time and repeatedly thereafter, but I do understand that protesters were reacting to a hard truth: that no one in the Judicial Branch was listening to them. Remember, the only person killed in violence that day was an unarmed woman, and her death was at the hand of Capitol Hill security. (As we learned later, another unarmed woman who died may also have been killed by police, beaten as she lay on the ground, trampled.)

Anyway, this time, Pelosi’s hearings, to be held in primetime starting Thursday, will be “produced” by former ABC News president James Goldston, producer for “Good Morning, America,” “Nightline” and “20/20.” His contribution to the Democrats is described as “an upcoming primetime multimedia presentation that has been likened to a high-quality investigative documentary special.”

FOX News reports that Goldston has actually joined the committee as a “soon-to-be announced advisor.” His video is the first in a series “designed to engage the American people and journalists” who had tuned out of the issue. With the country in chaos on virtually every front, Democrats are desperate to brainwash voters into not voting for Republicans no matter how bad it gets.

So expect this “series” to continue till Election Day, cranked out by the big Democrat propaganda machine.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-news-president-jan-6-commitee-primetime

They’ve also enlisted the help of former ABC producer Amy Robach, who’s best known for saying on a hot mic that her network had spiked her Jeffrey Epstein interview and quashed the story for three years. It seems appropriate that Nancy’s committee has hired people with experience in spiking stories; get ready for the real story of January 6 to be similarly suppressed.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/abc-amy-robach-jeffrey-epstein-hot-mic

What you definitely should watch is the rebuttal by Republicans led by New York Rep. Elise Stefanik. It will tell what Nancy’s committee hearings will not: that on January 4, President Trump himself, in front of multiple witnesses (former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, his chief of staff Kash Patel, and Gen. Mark Milley) in the Oval Office, BROUGHT UP the subject of offering Pelosi --- who as Speaker of the House is in charge of Capitol Hill security --- up to 20,000 National Guard troops for security during his rally, and that she, along with Washington DC Mayor Muriel Bowser and the Department of Defense, denied his offer.

According to Patel, there is ample documentation of all of this, which the January 6 committee should have but will likely not make a part of their primetime production. He says that what this committee really should do is release all documents and transcripts they have relative to January 6, showing that they acted appropriately, “and that the President’s authorization was unequivocal.”

“I can say definitively,” Miller told Hannity, “President Trump offered any and all support requested by suitable officials within Washington DC...federal and local.” He went on to say that the U.S. military, with 10,000 police officers scheduled for duty in DC that day, had said they could handle UP TO A MILLION DEMONSTRATORS without enlisting additional security. If that sounds crazy to you, it does to us, too. Think Nancy’s committee will address this at all?

Shockingly, Mayor Bowser actively discouraged “additional deployment,” as in this letter from a recent inspector general’s report (which, believe it or not, found preparations for the event “appropriate”): “To be clear, the District of Columbia is not requesting other federal law enforcement personnel and discourages any additional deployment without immediate notification to, and consultation with, MPD [Metro Police Department] if such plans are underway.”

Why not utilize more security if it is available? Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Gosh, you’d think Democrats were deliberately paving the way for the event to get out of control. Nah, surely that couldn't be.

As for Navarro, he was not at the Capitol on January 6 and did not encourage anyone to breach security. He ended up in handcuffs and shackles, sitting in a cell that once held would-be Reagan assassin John Hinckley, only because he wouldn’t violate President Trump’s executive privilege for Nancy’s committee. (And he'd told them he would have turned himself in; FBI headquarters is an easy walk from his next-door apartment.) The committee wants to know every detail of Trump’s private conversations, so they can go after him just for discussing the constitutionality of various courses of action. Not for carrying them out --- because he didn’t, of course –- but for TALKING about them with his advisers. Talking about them is not a crime. But this is all they have to try to keep him from running for President again.

Recall that a decade ago, Obama Attorney General Eric Holder was found in criminal contempt of Congress for citing executive privilege in refusing to comply with a subpoena relating to the “Fast and Furious” scandal that armed Mexican drug dealers and led to Border Patrol officer Brian Terry's murder. This charge had overwhelming, bipartisan support. NOTHING happened to Holder.

Tucker Carlson’s opening monologue Monday about the double standard of 'justice' featured a montage of media hacks trashing Navarro for his non-compliance. “This prosecution is really about punishing Navarro based on his blatant disrespect for the congressional subpoena,” said one typical idiot on MSNBC. Ah, so this is really about respect! Hey, if it’s illegal to blatantly disrespect this illegitimate committee or any of its work product, I guess we should be counting the minutes till the FBI breaks down our door and places us in handcuffs. It has given us no reason to grant it the slightest respect.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6307392441112#sp=show-clips

Mike Huckabee

Note to anyone wishing to censor, suppress, demonetize or otherwise interfere with the dissemination of this story: It makes no claim that any vulnerabilities of electronic voting systems were used to change the outcome of the 2020 election. (That’s a separate issue.) But a highly anticipated report by CISA --- the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency – has provided official documentation of the major security flaws posed by Dominion Voting Machines.

https://beckernews.com/highly-anticipated-cisa-report-on-dominion-voting-machines-proves-most-secure-election-in-history-was-a-lie-45236/

As Kyle Becker reports, the CISA findings were issued based on the analysis of J. Alex Halderman of the University of Michigan and Drew Springall of Auburn University.

Their overview lists nine different security concerns. These vulnerabilities “justify the concerns of election observers who pointed out that admin rights could be used to override security features and that the system could potentially be hijacked due to “spoofing.”

The vulnerabilities of the versions of Dominion’s ImageCastX software they were able to test could allow someone to disguise malicious applications on a device, gain elevated privileges and/or install malicious code, and perform arbitrary administrative actions. It gets worse: An attacker could also gain access to sensitive information and perform privileged actions to potentially affect other election equipment (!). Also, the “authentication mechanism” is susceptible to forgery, allowing an attacker to print an arbitrary number of ballots without authorization.

I’ll put it in layman’s terms. This system is a hot mess. And these are the same potential problems that some cyber experts have been trying to discuss for a year and a half.

CISA has a long, loooong list of recommendations for increasing the level of security in future elections. This list is so exhaustive that it’s hard to imagine all of them ever being followed. So, hey --- I have a great idea! Let’s scrap electronic voting systems entirely and go back to physical paper ballots with no connection to the internet, in-person voting except for very specific reasons, photo ID and poll watchers everywhere. That’s the only way we’re ever going to have faith in our elections now.

Importantly --- though the report itself doesn’t get into how the 2020 presidential election might have been affected --- Becker notes that “a number of these mitigation measures were not followed” at that time. These include:

--- ensuring physical security of machines and equipment (there were lost flash drives)

--- broken chain-of-custody procedures (don’t get us started about the drop boxes)

--- machines proven to have been connected to the internet

--- missing or destroyed ballot images

--- using QR codes instead of printouts that can be read by an actual person

Early on, CISA told us, “We can assure you we have utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should, too.” But, as Becker observes, “...CISA’s infamous claim that the 2020 election was ‘most secure in American history’ is clearly disproven by its own report two years after the fact.”

Ever since the election, voters who expressed any concern at all about election security and integrity were condemned for “destroying faith in our democracy.” Why, we were just conspiracy theorists, upset that the election didn’t turn out the way we wanted. But now, after all this time, we find that we were right to be concerned. And the machines themselves were just one facet of that extremely flawed stone that was the 2020 election.

How I wish this "official" vindication made me feel better. But with it coming so late, and knowing how little acknowledgment it will receive, I still feel a little sick.

Take a look at how it's being reported: CBS News twisted the headline to read, "U.S. finds no evidence flaws in Dominion voting machines were ever EXPLOITED." (Emphasis mine.) According to Becker, we don't know how hard they were even looking for that. "CISA can claim that it has no evidence of voting machines being exploited," Becker writes, "but voters are left to wonder if that is because they didn't seriously look."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/dominion-voting-machines-2020-election-cisa/

Mike Huckabee

Even some who don’t call themselves conservatives were taken aback by the treatment of former Trump economic and trade adviser Peter Navarro by Nancy Pelosi’s sham January 6 committee, which has charged him with contempt of Congress for not turning over materials and details of private conversations that President Trump maintains are privileged. Both Trump and Navarro also claim the committee isn’t even constitutional, as it violates the separation of powers. In addition, Pelosi hand-picked everyone on it, including the only two “Republicans” she allowed, Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney, both viciously anti-Trump.

As I’m sure you know, Navarro was arrested and handcuffed at the airport on Friday as he was about to board a flight to Nashville to appear on my TBN weekend show. This was done even though he‘d told them in writing on Wednesday he’d come in on his own if they asked. He also says he lives in an apartment that literally is next door to FBI headquarters, so he could've just walked over, or vice versa. Here’s what he had to say after his arrest, both the video and transcript. Peter has filed a civil suit against the committee.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2022/06/04/peter_navarro_speaks_after_indictment_arrest_for_contempt_january_6_kangaroo_committee_is_not_following_its_own_rules.html

Here’s what I had to say about it in this weekend’s opening monologue. (I also had a few words for the Michael Sussmann judge and jury.) I hope to have Peter on my show very soon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAh7H5zlK8M

Bestselling author and DILBERT cartoonist Scott Adams is one of those who found this committee’s behavior extremely discomforting, and he is not a Republican. In his “Coffee With Scott Adams” podcast on Saturday, Episode 1764 on YouTube, he weighed in. Here’s the link to the entire podcast; below are highlights and our comments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85f3zN3nMdw

After describing the manner in which Navarro was arrested, Adams asked, “Do you think they did that to Sussmann? Did Sussmann have shackles; did he get arrested in public?” That question, of course, was rhetorical; not only did law enforcement deal with Sussmann professionally, but the FBI had always treated him like a buddy. Sussmann had his own FBI security badge, free to come and go at their headquarters. According to recent reports, he even occupied the FBI’s “secure work environment” at his law firm, Perkins Coie, with a portal to the FBI database --- a highly unusual arrangement.  He was that special!

“So I saw Peter Navarro talking about [his arrest],” Adams said, “after he got released, probably on bail, I guess, and [long pause]...did you see this? Can you tell me how this made you feel? Because, I felt something. And I didn’t like it at all. What happened to Roger Stone, I said to myself, ‘Well, this is a travesty, but it might also be a one-off. It’s not one-off. Apparently, there’s just a different standard for how the Trump supporters are being treated. This is so clear now...I mean, this is just shocking.”

He continued: “Now, Peter Navarro also has a new book out, called TAKING BACK TRUMP’S AMERICA, which as of this morning [Saturday] was #4 on Amazon. And I’ve been pumping it up, telling people to buy his book, ‘cause it’s how he’s gonna pay for his defense. I don’t know if he can even make enough money from the book, even if it’s a #1 bestseller, to pay for the defense, because the defense is pretty expensive, but I thought, ‘I don’t like where this went. I don’t like what my government did, and I would like to push a little power back in his direction.’”

He said that “as one small thing” he could do, he’s been tweeting support for Navarro’s book. “I’ve pre-ordered it,” he said, “and I’d recommend that you do the same. If it gets to #1, then his defense will be bolstered, both financially and in the public, and I think that that’s the appropriate way to handle this.”

Adams then went off on an interesting tangent, saying he can see why some might not support Trump, “because he was divisive," but explaining why he supported him in 2016: “I wanted him to break everything. ‘Cause everything needed to be broken...And in a large way, I got what I wanted. He did demolish everything...[chuckling] not without its cost. It’s not free to demolish stuff...But there wasn’t any chance they could keep working the way they were working. So we needed somebody strong enough to just break the system, and...I think he did that, in a number of ways.”

He said that thanks to Trump, “there are things that we think about differently, permanently now...so we understand ‘fake news,’” etc.

“But this Peter Navarro thing is almost like a Bat-call for Trump,” he said. (He’d also like to hear Ron DeSantis’ take on it.) “But if Peter Navarro ends up serving jail time or something, for this –- what appears to be hunting Republicans, you know, the whole January 6 witch-hunt sort of thing, which is not to say there weren’t bad people who need to be brought to justice; everybody understands… –- this feels as though it could happen to me. Like actually, literally me. Actually, I saw myself in chains.”

Adams is right to consider that possibility. It COULD happen to him, or you, or certainly to me. It’s a risk for anyone they see as effective in running counter to their rules and their message. I would add that those who, like him, have a history of leaning left are particularly at risk. These one-time leftists who have had epiphanies --- Brandon Straka of #WalkAway is a great example --- are well aware of the hatred directed at them now and how the legal system has been turned against them.

Here’s Straka on my show a few weeks ago, describing how he was treated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouesaYreJEU

As for Adams, he doesn’t “mind a good fight, so let’s bring that on.” He added later in the show that if Navarro goes to prison over this, he’ll likely support Trump, as it would show things still really need to be broken, “though there is a risk of him over-breaking it.” Adams thought DeSantis might also be able to do the necessary breaking but that he still needs to prove himself to be strongly pro-free speech.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy appeared on SUNDAY MORNING FUTURES to explain what’s twisted about Pelosi’s committee and also to provide more details about Navarro’s arrest. Apparently, law enforcement followed him on his ride to the airport to arrest him there and “make a scene and to handcuff him.” He added that with their plan to hold prime-time public hearings, they’re showing themselves to be “a political committee going after their opponents and trying to raise money.”

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6307325831112#sp=show-clips

To end on a high note, the GOP is not taking this lying down, and they'll be running rapid-response programming during the Democrats’ kangaroo-court proceedings. New York Rep. Elise Stefanik is presiding, and she's guaranteed to shine. They’ll address what Nancy’s committee should investigate but won’t: how security at the Capitol Hill rally was completely botched, a disaster. Here are the details.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/06/04/exclusive-rep-elise-stefanik-gop-ready-to-provide-counter-programming-to-illegitimate-january-6-hearing/

Mike Huckabee

After a very long count of a very close vote, David McCormick conceded to Dr. Mehmet Oz in the Pennsylvania GOP Senate primary race and pledged his support.

https://redstate.com/carcand/2022/06/03/breaking-david-mccormick-concedes-to-dr-mehmet-oz-in-pennsylvania-senate-primary-n574593

Oz will face Democrat candidate and current state Lieutenant Governor John Fetterman, who made news of his own. Questions have been swirling about whether Fetterman was hiding health problems after he suffered a small stroke and still isn’t back on the campaign trail. This week, he released a letter from a doctor claiming that he has heart problems and a pacemaker/defibrillator. But he’s stable and if he follows doctors’ advice (which he admits he ignored for five years, but claims he's learned his lesson), he should be okay. But since it’s not from his regular doctors but one who, until this week, hadn’t seen him since 2017, it’s raising even more concerns.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/06/03/dem-senate-candidate-john-fetterman-releases-a-doozy-of-a-letter-from-his-doctor-n574430

Meanwhile, Twitchy.com noted that this will be a Senate race between a retired heart surgeon and a guy who’s off the campaign trail due to a heart problem. At least if any emergencies occur during the debates, there’ll be a heart doctor in the house.

In other political developments, New York Republican Rep. Chris Jacobs announced that he will not run for reelection because of all the angry blowback he’s getting from Republicans and conservatives for joining with Democrats to support a federal “assault weapons” ban.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-rep-chris-jacobs-announces-retirement-gun-control

And in Tennessee’s 5th Congressional District, Trump-backed GOP House candidate Robby Starbuck won his legal challenge against the state Republican Executive Committee, which voted to remove him, Morgan Ortegus and Baxter Lee from the ballot over alleged eligibility issues. Starbuck did provide alternative proof that he was eligible to run, and the court ruled that the committee violated the state’s open meetings law with its sudden, secretive vote to remove the candidates. There’s more at the link, but it’s not clear if Ortegus and Lee will try to get back in the race, since they were removed from the ballot at the same illegal meeting.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/national-gas-prices-double-since-biden-took-office

Mike Huckabee

We offered a theory after Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann walked last week that we now formally call The "Loss Leader" Theory. Just as a retail store might offer some product, such as a jug of milk, at below cost –- a “loss leader” –- to get customers into the store and buy more, so Special Counsel John Durham prosecuted a small case he knew he would lose in the DC courts, to introduce evidence suggestive of far greater misdeeds.

This appears to have been done with Michael Sussmann, even as he walked out of court free and clear on his charge of lying to the FBI. Emails included as part of his trial raise questions as to his role in something else involving the FBI; namely, shaping the narrative of the so-called “Russian hack” of the DNC and the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee). You know, the “hack” for which there is no evidence –- at least that the public has seen –- of it being a Russian hack, or even a hack at all.

THE EPOCH TIMES has obtained trial documents and, in a premium story, reports that “Sussmann proposed alterations to an FBI statement on the hacking of the [DCCC] to avoid undermining the narrative for his clients.” And the FBI bent to his will.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/fbi-altered-statement-on-intrusion-into-democrat-network-based-on-input-from-lawyer_4505749.html

In July 2016, Jim Trainor, assistant director for the FBI Cyber Division, wrote Sussmann, who was representing the DNC and DCCC, to get his “thoughts” on the FBI’s draft response to all the phone calls they were getting on the “Russia hack” story. Sussmann read the draft and wrote back:

“The draft you sent says only that the FBI is aware of media reports; it does not say that the FBI is aware of the INTRUSION [emphasis ours] that the DCCC reported. Indeed, it refers only to a “possible” cyber intrusion and in that way undermines what the DCCC said in its statement (or at least calls into question what the DCCC said).”

Trainer went right along with Sussmann’s proposed changes. Instead of saying the FBI is aware of reporting on “a possible cyber intrusion involving the DCCC,” it would say the Bureau “is aware of the cyber intrusion involving the DCCC that has been reported in the media and the FBI has been working to determine the nature and scope of the matter.”

To provide some context, one day before this email exchange between Sussmann and Trainor, then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed President Obama that Russia was aware of a plan by Hillary to “vilify” her rival, Trump, by “stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.” Days later, the CIA told the FBI they had intelligence showing Clinton’s plan was meant to distract the public from her own scandal, the use of a private email server for classified government business.

Recall that the DNC and DCCC hired the private cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike to investigate the so-called “intrusions.” The FBI opened their own investigation, but they were relying on server images and reports produced by CrowdStrike and partially redacted. The Bureau requested the unredacted documents but never received them. According to another email produced at trial, Sussmann was the point person between the FBI and the DNC/DCCC.

Other emails between Sussmann and Trainor show Sussmann upset that the FBI had announced it was investigating. He requested the Bureau consult him before making public statements about it. A compliant Trainor apologized and agreed. He said the FBI and the “victims” (the alleged hack-ees) would be “equally cooperative partners as we navigate this matter.”

Note that in changing the words of Trainer’s draft, Sussmann was firming up his preferred narrative that this breach DID HAPPEN, not just that it possibly did. He wanted to have no question of this, even though the FBI had not concluded it on their own and would always simply take CrowdStrike’s word. Trainer’s original draft was really more accurate.

So we’ve established that Sussmann was the point man and storyteller for something that still remains a mystery, an event that appears to have set up the whole Russia Hoax. It seems to us that the truth about it might be one of those big-ticket items in the store; Sussmann’s doomed trial on one count of lying was just the jug of cheap milk that got us in there.

Mike Huckabee

I often refer to modern so-called “anti-racist” efforts as the “racist anti-racist” movement. That’s not a partisan pejorative. I honestly believe that the left, under the guise of fighting racism, is actually attempting to divide Americans, foment hatred and suspicion of other races, and bring back the vile days of officially-enforced segregation and judging people by the color of their skin rather than the content of their character. Why do I think that? Because they just keep telling us over and over.

Here’s the latest example: Under the cloak of “equity,” some schools are now instituting race-based grading. The latest example is in Oak Park, Illinois, but as the linked story reports, it’s a growing trend that started in San Diego and like exotic diseases, wildfires and most awful leftist ideas, started spreading eastward from California.

https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2022/05/31/illinois-high-schools-implement-new-grading-practices-for-equity-n473102

The Illinois plan is typical of leftist policies in that it comes couched in fuzzy four-dollar words to hide its toxicity. It’s called “Transformative Education Professional Development and Grading.” It claims that “traditional grading practices perpetuate inequities and intensify the opportunity gap” through “outdated practices” and “unconscious biases” like letting “non-academic factors” such as student behavior and whether a student shows up to class interfere with teacher evaluation of students. Things like showing up late, misbehaving in class or handing in work late cannot reduce a student’s overall class grade.

While the Illinois plan doesn’t mention any particular race that this is supposed to benefit, it does condemn the traditional system it’s replacing as a “race-based grading system,” so it’s pretty clear what the insulting thinking is behind this. It used to be called “the soft bigotry of low expectations,” but now it’s called “equity.”

This should be abhorrent to people of all races. I do have to say, though, that I admire the one teacher quoted who was brave enough to question what this will do to students. She noted that she has a job where she’s expected to show up on time, do the work and behave professionally. This system will not prepare students for what they’re going to encounter when they leave school and join the real world.

But it is a truly “transformative” system if you want students to be so poorly prepared for the work world that they’re transformed into permanent dependents of the state. I get the feeling that’s the “equity” they’d like to impose on all of us.

Mike Huckabee

I’m not certain if there’s any point anymore in keeping track of President Biden’s poll numbers, other than for the same kind of curiosity that comes with watching a limbo contest: “How low can they go?!” For those keeping track, they just went even lower. The latest Civiqs Poll found Biden’s disapproval holding steady at 55%, but his approval rating dropping from 37 to 34%.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/05/31/biden-is-furious-that-hes-below-trump-in-polls-but-it-just-got-even-worse-n572713

I’m not certain who the people are who approve of how things are going, but 34% approval is down there with heat rash and ketchup on salmon. Biden’s approval rating has even dropped to 35% in his home state of Delaware. He’s even at 42% approval/46% disapproval in California (But that could partly be because he’s not instituting even worse policies fast enough for some California leftists. Here’s a good example, and brace yourselves for maximum insanity.)

https://www.breitbart.com/education/2022/06/01/california-state-senate-passes-bill-to-allow-schools-not-to-report-threats/

There are only three states where Biden’s approval rating is higher than his disapproval rating – Vermont, Massachusetts and Hawaii – and Hawaii is the only one where his approval reached 50%.

Biden’s approval rating is now lower than Trump’s, and Biden has gotten a free ride from the media while Trump was vilified on a daily basis. According to NBC News, Biden is reportedly furious that his approval rating is lower than Trump’s, and he’s casting around for a “better messaging strategy.”

https://www.westernjournal.com/report-biden-rattled-approval-rating-sinking-trumps-pleads-aides-new-strategy/

I’ve written about this many times before: whenever leftist policies crash and fail, as they inevitably do, it’s never because the policies don’t work. It’s always because the public just doesn’t know how successful they are because the media are so biased against Democrats. I know, when you put it into words, it sounds even crazier.

Guy Benson at Townhall.com recounted some of Biden’s excuses, blame-shifting and self-pitying rationalizations for Americans not liking the problems that his own policies have created.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2022/05/31/lets-talk-about-that-nbc-news-story-on-biden-white-house-chaos-n2608000

Biden is reportedly pushing his staff "to make a sharper case for all that we have accomplished thus far." I don’t think that’s going to help. Most Americans are well aware of what he’s accomplished. I report on that every day.

I also don’t think that whining about all the problems he inherited is going to help. He knew the problems and ran on a promise that only he knew how to fix them. He also inherited a rebounding economy, a secure border, three COVID vaccines, cheap and abundant oil and gas, and a plan for withdrawing safely from Afghanistan. If I’m going to feel sorry for any President, it will be whoever takes over the job from him.

Maybe the most worrisome Biden complaint is that he thinks he’s making clear, succinct statements and then his staff rushes out to contradict and correct him. The media are concerned that that plays into Republican messaging that he’s weak and incoherent. Yeah, that’s the problem. Not the weakness and incoherence, but the Republicans pointing it out.

Mike Huckabee

The reign of terror and error by transgender activists might finally be coming to an end, judging by several news stories that all came in over the weekend. First, another top executive at Netflix defended Dave Chappelle's and Ricky Gervais' right to make jokes about trans people as a free speech issue, just as comedians make jokes about anyone else, despite the furious calls for boycotts and censorship and the hyperbolic claims that joking about the excesses of trans activists will cause people to die.

https://news.yahoo.com/netflix-says-standing-dave-chappelle-171600618.html

Even some members of the trans community are speaking up in defense of Gervais, saying that he’s not attacking trans people, he’s speaking truth to power about the excesses of trans activists. One trans journalist wrote, “Trans activist ideology has run unchecked for too long, and it is time to call it to account."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/some-members-of-trans-community-support-ricky-gervais-amid-netflix-backlash/ar-AAXV4DE

“Harry Potter” creator J.K. Rowling has also refused to knuckle under to the cancel crowd and continues to speak out in defense of women (as Gervais would say, the old-fashioned kind, with wombs.) She was attacked for tweeting a news story about terrified women inmates at a New Jersey prison where officials are housing violent male felons who claim to “identify” as women. But HBO is still seeking a new creative deal with her.

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1530576557839994882

And then the most surprising and possibly portentous pushback of all: the New York Times actually ran a story Sunday on the trans takeover of women’s sports that not only fairly presented the concerns of female athletes (who came across as much more sympathetic than the selfish “#MeFirst” attitudes of the trans activists they quoted), it actually included comments from doctors. These experts who have medical degrees (and I assume, eyes) said that swimmer Lia Thomas does have an unfair advantage because going through puberty as a male confers physical advantages that a year or even four years of testosterone-lowering hormones cannot reverse.

Of course, irrefutable biological facts aren’t enough to stop Thomas, who now wants to compete against women in the Olympics, where officials are still easily cowed by accusations of transphobia.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10871087/Trans-swimmer-Lia-Thomas-says-doesnt-need-anyones-permission-swim-woman.html

Sister Toldjah at Redstate.com sees all these things as hopeful signs that the tide of public opinion is finally turning against the tidal wave of radical transgender insanity that’s engulfed society over the past two years. Or at least that people are finally growing spines.

https://redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2022/05/30/breakthrough-ny-times-story-on-trans-athletes-more-proof-dems-are-losing-woke-culture-war-advantage-n572340

I think the trans people who are defending Ricky Gervais are right: these radical activists are doing them more harm than good. They say they just want to be accepted to live their lives like anyone else, but the radicals are insisting that they be treated as a special class, with the right to never be called out no matter how unreasonable they are, to never be laughed at (as we all are at times), and to have the power to destroy anyone who criticizes them.

They claim to be a poor oppressed minority and say that any criticism of them is “punching down,” even as they’re the ones crushing other people. News flash: When people are cowering in fear that you’ll glare their way and destroy their lives, careers and reputations just because they told a joke you don’t like, you aren’t a powerless underdog. You’re that monstrous child who sent people to the cornfield on “The Twilight Zone.”

Mike Huckabee

By now, you know that Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann was found not guilty of lying to the FBI, even though he did.

In his statement after the trial, Sussmann said he didn’t lie to the FBI. But that was a lie, too. Special Counsel John Durham had absolute proof, in the form of a Perkins Coie billing record and a text to then-FBI general counsel James Baker saying that Sussmann wasn’t meeting with him on behalf of clients when he really was. But the judge used a technicality to let jurors weigh that second piece of evidence minimally, as it had been handed over to Durham by Baker after the statute of limitations had lapsed. Once Sussmann couldn’t be charged for THAT lie –- the one in the text –- Baker happened to remember some texts, including that one. Isn’t it funny how a lapsed statute of limitations can jog someone’s memory?

So it appears Baker and Sussmann were on the same team. Baker helped Sussmann, and so did the judge, who worked like a champ to keep Durham’s evidence out of the courtroom.

Nick Arama discusses the judge’s ruling on Sussmann’s text message here. He also reviews what Durham managed to expose about Hillary and her campaign, noting there is more to come.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/05/31/we-may-not-like-the-sussmann-verdict-but-the-clinton-campaign-was-nailed-n572799

Durham surely knew by the time the jury had been seated --- maybe even by the assignment of U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee with huge ties to the Democrat Party and the DOJ --- that his chances of getting a conviction in this Washington DC court were nil. Heck, he probably knew it all along, but he had his reasons for pursuing it. Those who insist Durham’s defeat is some kind of “black mark” against his investigation are missing the important stuff.

Durham has exposed what Hillary and her campaign did, which went well beyond the “political dirty trick” of peddling a fake story to the media. They reinforced their fake story by also peddling it to the FBI to push for an investigation. In other words, they went to federal law enforcement under false pretenses to frame a political opponent, and THAT, if you or I did it, would be very serious indeed.

But this jury treated it like nothing. This is evident because the jury forewoman, who doesn’t give her name, has spoken to the media. And now we can see she went beyond the scope of what she was there to determine, concluding that the case shouldn’t have been prosecuted at all. “There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI,” she told the media.

Oh, REALLY?? What if, say, a Republican attorney for the Trump campaign had gone to a Republican-appointed FBI official with a fake story about Hillary Clinton a few days before the 2016 election, and had flat-out lied and said he wasn’t representing Trump? (Not that anyone would need to peddle a fake story about Hillary; there were enough real scandals about her.) Do you think this solid-Democrat Washington DC jury would just blow that off?

Of course not. They’d call it the crime of the century. They’d say this attorney was working with Russians. They’d blame him for Hillary’s loss. They’d call him an ultra-MAGA deplorable, an insurrectionist, destroyer of institutions, election-interferer. Their quick verdict would be Guilty, Guilty, Guilty. They might not even need any hard evidence, just an accusation by the Democrat special counsel. And that lawyer would be off to jail.

Of course, the judge made it a lot easier for the jury to think this was nothing, as he largely kept Durham’s evidence of the “joint venture” (broader conspiracy) out of the courtroom.

As Jonathan Turley tweeted: “Telling a lie to the FBI was the entire basis for the prosecution. It was the jury’s job to determine the fact of such a lie and its materiality.” As in, ONLY THAT. Turley noted that such a bias, if expressed during jury selection, would have led to this woman being challenged by the prosecution.

And Durham surely would’ve challenged her, but recall that Judge Cooper actually refused his challenge of some members of the jury pool who ended up on the jury.

The kicker: This woman insisted after the trial that politics had not been a factor.

Throughout the past two weeks, we’ve discussed the various factors that people are pointing to now in the post mortem. As Andrew C. McCarthy told FOX News Thursday evening, “In order to figure out this case, I think you really have to make up your mind about what the FBI is. Are they ‘a dupe’ or are they a willing collaborator? Durham has staked his investigation on the notion that they’re a dupe. You have to prove, for materiality purposes in a false statements trial, that the ‘duped’ party actually was fooled. And I think the evidence here was pretty strong that...they weren’t fooled at all by it. They fully knew that they were getting political information from a partisan source. And a lot of what they did was designed to conceal the fact that they knew that.”

All true. But that’s what we think Durham was really in that courtroom to show. Again, he had to know he would lose the Sussmann case, given the judge and jury. We believe this case was, to Durham, a “loss leader.” As you probably know, that’s a term in retail that describes a store selling one item, such as milk, at a loss, just to get people into the store. Similarly, the Sussmann case had to be a loss for Durham, but look at what it accomplished for the investigation as a whole!

In that observation, we are more in line with what Margot Cleveland says in her analysis from Tuesday. “...For all posterity,” she writes, Clinton’s fingerprints will be seen covering the worst political scandal of our country’s history.”

Here’s what she wrote just prior to the jury’s verdict, which, of course, she expected.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/31/even-if-the-jury-doesnt-convict-michael-sussmann-the-special-counsel-has-won/

"...Measuring Durham’s performance by the outcome in United States v. Sussmann would be a mistake,” she said. “...It would ignore the valuable information exposed related to the broader Spygate scandal. Using that gauge as a measure, the special counsel’s office succeeded wildly.”

Her piece is a must-read. It’s infuriating to see how much was made of the Alfa Bank story and the whole Trump-Russia Hoax, considering that it was all based on NOTHING. It became an industry, a make-work program for lawyers. Years wasted, hundreds of attorneys and investigators, many millions of dollars, people’s lives ruined (Michael Flynn, to name one), and the country divided, all over a fake story.

“Justice” became a joke. As Charles Lipson wrote for SPECTATOR, “Despite Sussmann’s not-guilty verdict, his trial revealed the rank odor of Washington politics. It suffuses our courts, our law enforcement bureaucracy, and the mainstream media. It reeks of insider dealing and extreme partisan bias. That stench should alarm anyone concerned about America’s ability to govern democratically.”

This is what the special counsel has exposed, and will continue to expose. Thank you, Mr. Durham.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/stench-from-the-sussmann-verdict/

Mike Huckabee

Mike Huckabee

Once a year, on the last Monday in May, we set aside a day to honor our fellow Americans who made the greatest of all sacrifices so that the rest of us could continue to enjoy the blessings of liberty and security. Although this has been an especially tragic month, with many innocent victims to mourn, we can’t let this day pass without paying our respects to those who gave their lives for our freedom and security, both recently and long ago.

Memorial Day was born after the Civil War, when families would take a day to tend and decorate the graves of Confederate soldiers. It soon spread to the North, and became known as Decoration Day. Eventually, it became a national holiday to honor all American military veterans who gave up their homes, their families, their very lives -- everything they had, or ever dreamed of having – all in sacrifice for their country. And just how many have made that ultimate sacrifice? Brace yourself:

From the Revolutionary War to the War of 1812, the Civil War and Spanish American war, World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and all the other wars, police actions and rescue missions around the world since 1776, over one million, three hundred and eight thousand Americans have died in uniform.

Imagine if all those soldiers, sailors, Marines and airmen could come back to life for a Memorial Day parade. Picture them marching past in rows of ten, each row taking just 10 seconds to pass. That parade would stretch on and on, row after row, 360 rows per hour, for hour after hour, 24 hours a day, for over 15 straight days. That is the enormity of the military casualties America has experienced since 1776. That doesn’t even include the millions more who sacrificed their limbs, their sight, their peace of mind, and the best years of their lives, all for us.

Makes you realize just how ignorant and slanderous it is to claim America's history is built on slavery, racism and selfishness instead of freedom, compassion and sacrifice.

Today's military members, like those before them, risk their lives to protect the cherished American principles of liberty, equality, democracy, fighting tyranny and defending the weak. Previous generations guarded these bedrock principles so that they could be passed down to us. It is now our sacred duty to preserve them for future generations.

Every year, the American Legion sells poppy pins to support veterans and their families. May 27th was National Poppy Day this year (https://www.legion.org/poppyday). I hope you bought one and are wearing it proudly. If not, you can still go to the website, buy their merchandise and support them.

The poppy became the symbol of Memorial Day, thanks to the famous poem, “In Flanders’ Fields,” by Canadian Lt. Col. John McCrae. He wrote it in memory of his friend Alexis Helmer, whom he watched die in battle in World War I.

The poem starts, “In Flanders’ fields, the poppies blow,

Between the crosses, row on row…”

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/47380/in-flanders-fields

Read the poem at the link. It's very short, but it conveys a powerful message of the depth of those soldiers' sacrifice and the debt we owe them all.

With the pandemic receding, we can once again gather in most places to show our support for veterans and our gratitude to those who gave their lives to protect our freedom. But even if you can’t, you can still proudly fly the American flag today. And we can all offer support to some of the many great veterans’ organizations, such as the VFW and the American Legion.

Another great new organization with an especially timely mission is Code Of Vets, founded by Air Force Veteran, Gretchen Smith. She and a staunch supporter, the late Charlie Daniels, once appeared on “Huckabee” on TBN to talk about the group’s efforts to provide support to veterans struggling through the pandemic. You can learn more and donate at http://www.codeofvets.com. It’s tax-deductible, and with their 1% operating costs, you can rest easy knowing that 99 cents of every dollar given goes directly to help veterans in need.

And of course, one more thing we can all do from wherever we are is stop for a moment and think of all the rows and rows of crosses in veterans’ cemeteries…say a prayer of thanks to them…and remember that each and every cross represents a genuine American hero who made the ultimate sacrifice for all of us.

McCrae’s poem ends, “To you, from failing hands, we throw the torch. Be yours, to hold it high. If ye break faith with us who die, we shall not sleep, though poppies grow in Flanders’ fields.” If you really want to memorialize these greatest of American heroes, then take up the torch they passed to us. Hold it high, and never let it drop.

Mike Huckabee

Closing statements were given Friday morning in the Michael Sussmann case, and the jury started their deliberations that afternoon. Since this is Memorial Day weekend, they’ll come back Tuesday to continue deliberating.

The jury will determine whether or not to convict Sussmann of lying to then-FBI General Counsel James Baker when he told him in his office –- never mind the incriminating text we’ve all seen from the day before –- that in meeting with him to discuss the (phony) Alfa Bank story, he wasn’t representing any clients. As FOX News reported Friday, Sussmann’s attorneys slammed Durham’s case against him as “misdirection.” On the contrary, his evidence that Sussmann lied to Baker is as direct as it gets.

Tammy Bruce, sitting in as host on Friday’s HANNITY, talked with FOX News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett and Trump attorney Alina Habba about the case. Jarrett jokingly referred to the defense’s argument as “A lie is not a lie if the recipient of the lie realizes it’s a lie.” He said that was the most outrageous rationalization for a lie that he’d ever heard.

In paraphrasing the defense’s argument, he showed how they contradicted themselves and actually incriminated Sussmann, their own client, “by saying, first, he really wasn’t representing Hillary Clinton during that FBI meeting, and then in the next breath...‘But because the FBI figured out he was representing Hillary Clinton in that meeting, it’s not really a lie.”

Jarrett seconded Jonathan Turley’s comment that this is the worst jury he's ever seen in his life. “This is a jury that is stacked with Hillary Clinton supporters,” Jarrett said, “[including] three Hillary Clinton DONORS… The problem is, there really are no Republicans in Washington DC, from which the jury is drawn. You’d have a better chance of spotting a unicorn than a Republican in Washington DC. And so...the defendant is hoping they will acquit him simply because he hates Donald Trump and they do, too.”

The way this case is being tried certainly supports President Trump’s argument about the two systems of “justice.” And Habba, Trump’s attorney in the case he’s filed against many (including Hillary) who damaged him by spreading the fake Russia Hoax, said he was well aware of that. “I mean, the man knows how corrupt it is,” she said, “and that’s why he’s so passionate about defending this country, and ‘correcting’ the country.”

(By the way, she mentioned that he attended the NRA convention at this sensitive time “because he cares about this country.” Trump, from the podium, said the name of every child killed in Uvalde and rang a bell for them.)

As for the Sussmann trial, she said, “I feel like I just sat through two weeks of the soap opera about the demise of America. It was despicable. And to see a jury that --- I hope they come to their senses. When you have a text message that so obviously states, ‘Hey, I’m about to lie to you”...how can you not call that a lie?

She said the defense spoke of this case as “a David Copperfield trick,” adding with a laugh, “That was the best they had. If I ever as an attorney have to do that, please, Gregg, come get me and tell me to step down.”

Seriously, though, it could be that Sussmann’s attorneys don’t think they even have to try very hard, given this jury. In a normal case, a person such as you or I found guilty of this charge might easily spend a couple of years behind bars. As Jarrett pointed out, Sussmann is “actually very lucky that he wasn’t charged with conspiracy to defraud the government by knowingly, willingly peddling phony information to the government.”

Of course, that whole group of disingenuous low-lifes involved in the Russia Hoax, including Hillary, should face that charge. Bruce questioned the fact that they weren’t all charged with conspiracy, but as we’ve said earlier, Durham saw the writing on the wall if he were to bring that case to a DC jury. He didn’t want to put THE big conspiracy case in front of them and lose. Better to use a small case to get the real story out.

Still, as Jarrett said, “Lady Justice peeks beneath the blindfold, and weights the scales of justice. If you’re a Republican, it’s weighted against you. If you’re a Democrat, it’s in your great favor.”

Consistent with that, a couple of days into Sussmann’s trial, Jonathan Turley compared the way Sussmann is being treated in his case by Judge Christopher Cooper with the way Michael Flynn was treated in his, by Judge Emmet Sullivan. Flynn’s case was held in the same Washington, DC, courthouse, but what a difference. This is a must-read.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3492664-tale-of-two-trials-how-sussmann-is-receiving-every-consideration-denied-to-flynn/

Recall that Judge Sullivan abused Flynn in his courtroom, suggesting that Flynn should be charged with treason --- which was never on the table --- and saying to him, “I cannot assure you that if you proceed today, you will not receive a sentence of incarceration. I am not hiding my disgust and my disdain.” Recall also that Sullivan tried to continue the case against Flynn even after it had been dismissed by the DOJ, apparently planning to serve as judge and prosecutor rolled into one.

Legal analyst Margot Cleveland posted her update on the case Friday morning, after the judge had issued his instructions to the jury. Her view coincides with that of other jaded trial-watchers: 1) the evidence against Sussmann is overwhelming, incontrovertible proof of his guilt, and 2) he probably won’t be convicted.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/27/why-the-jury-should-convict-michael-sussmann-of-lying-to-the-fbi-but-probably-wont/

She mentions something we hadn’t seen reported that dispels all doubt his meeting with Baker really was on behalf of Clinton’s campaign. Did you know Sussmann even billed the campaign for the two THUMB DRIVES he gave to Baker? Gosh, you’d think that for $800 an hour, he would’ve thrown those in for free.

Cleveland goes on to show how tightly Durham had this case wrapped up, evidence-wise.

But the defense benefits, she says, from the “disinterested approach to justice” exhibited by the witnesses Durham called. He wasn’t “out to get Sussmann,” Baker said on the stand. If the defendant had lied to them and misrepresented himself, the FBI hardly seemed to care. And if those witnesses are going to shrug off the lie, Cleveland reasons, the jury probably will, too. No big deal, right?

Going further, just about everyone in that DC courtroom –- defendant, defense attorneys, witnesses, jurors –- sees Durham as a political enemy. Does that mean the jurors will simply ignore the facts and the law of this case and use the process of jury nullification to say, “hey, we’re Democrats, we don’t give a rat’s behind what this guy did”?

Quite likely. But even if they do,, the case Durham brought was so airtight that we can say, with complete confidence, Sussmann DID this. We also can say that as an attorney for Hillary’s campaign, he did it with her approval. There shouldn't be a need to put the word “alleged” in front of the charge Durham made against him. Whether this jury finds him guilty or not, Durham showed that he criminally lied, in service to Hillary Clinton, and we all know it.

Mike Huckabee

My friend Mike Rowe is the latest to allegedly be targeted by the government for his political beliefs – even though he doesn’t even talk about his political beliefs!

https://www.theblaze.com/news/mike-rowe-dirty-jobs-permit

Mike says he was all set to shoot an episode of his show “Dirty Jobs” on boilermakers when the Government Services Administration suddenly yanked permits they’d had for months, claiming vague “security concerns.” It ruined months of costly preparation, caused his freelance crew to lose work and have no time to line up other jobs, and kept the boilermakers from being able to show America what they do.

Mike said he’s shot shows in all sorts of sensitive government environments, from the Capitol to a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and never had a problem. Then he said he got a call from someone high up in the GSA, telling him that another GSA higher-up didn’t like his “personal politics” and deliberately strung him along just to yank the permits at the last possible second.

If true, this is not only yet another example of politicized bureaucrats arrogantly abusing their power, it’s also stupid. Mike Rowe doesn’t discuss his personal politics, and he pointed out that his foundation is “aggressively nonpartisan” and gives scholarships to liberals and conservatives alike. All he can figure is that the petty tyrant doesn’t like the fact that his show “How America Works” airs on Fox Business.

I’ll add that his great show “The Story Behind the Story” airs right after “Huckabee” Saturday nights on TBN. Maybe that’s why the GSA jerk’s nose was out of joint. I spend too much time telling you the sleazy stories behind how Washington works. And now, we have another one.

Mike Huckabee

Before we get started on the Sussmann trial update, there’s one piece of business that needs to be addressed. Yesterday, I wondered how much the high-powered Perkins Coie attorney Michael Sussmann was charging Hillary For America for his consequential little FBI visit. Those fancy DC lawyers cost a pretty penny --- I was thinking $500-600 an hour. That kind of money adds up fast, into the millions, and it’s why Michael Flynn had to sell his house to defend himself against limitless malicious prosecution.

But I have to admit, we were wrong. A top DC lawyer is apparently even pricier. As Miranda Devine at the NEW YORK POST put it, “[Sussmann] is hoisted by his own petard because he couldn’t help but charge the Clinton campaign $800 per hour...to perpetrate this dirty-tricks campaign against Donald Trump on behalf of Hillary Clinton.”

That’s right, folks, $800 per hour. But, hey, Sussmann billed just 3.3 hours for the day, and given the events he set in motion with his visit to FBI general counsel James Baker, Hillary must have thought it was money well spent! As Devine said on “FOX & Friends” Thursday morning, “She sanctioned, she approved this attempt to dirty-up Donald Trump and paint him as an agent of the Kremlin. The ramifications of that dirty trick went on, crippled the Trump presidency, did great damage to this country, [and were the] source of a lot of the rancor and division that we see now.” What a bargain!

And it was a drop in the bucket, considering the millions Perkins Coie was already receiving to fund Fusion GPS and, through them, the Steele “dossier.” Fusion GPS only paid Christopher Steele $168,000.

Devine summarized: “It may seem that the charge [against Sussmann] is small, but actually, the ramifications and the report that will come from John Durham are momentous. And we should all pay very close attention to it.”

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2022/05/26/miranda-devine-dishes-on-delicious-details-of-durham-case-predicts-ramifications-will-be-momentous-1242908/

Now, let’s catch up on Day 9 of the trial. First, we learned that closing arguments will begin Friday morning because Sussmann is not taking the stand in his own defense. (Too bad, but did anyone seriously think he would?) On Thursday morning, he declined to testify, and the defense rested.

Also, Durham has just been handed a potentially serious problem. In a couple of rulings Thursday, the Obama-appointed and heavily conflicted judge in this case, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, erected some huge obstacles for the special counsel. As legal analyst Andrew C. McCarthy wrote for FOX News, they are a “predictable but damaging blow to the prosecution” that make his case against Sussmann much harder to prove to the jury.

First, even though the text Sussmann sent to Baker is THE smoking gun –- ironclad proof that he lied to Baker –- Judge Cooper ruled that prosecutors must rely not on that text but on evidence that he actually told the lie the following day, while meeting with Baker, in Baker’s office at the FBI. That’s the insane degree of hairsplitting that is going on.

It stems from a legal technicality. McCarthy explains it in detail, but in a nutshell, it’s because at the time of Sussmann’s indictment, prosecutors didn’t have the text, so he wasn’t charged for THAT lie. Why, then, didn’t Durham create a superseding indictment that included both lies as separate counts? The problem is that the five-year statue of limitations was about to kick in when Durham charged Sussmann with lying in Baker’s office. The text to Baker didn’t come to Durham’s attention for another six months –- when Baker says he found it and turned it over –- and by then the statute of limitations had lapsed. Even just altering the original charging document to include anything about that text would invite legal objections. So Durham was stuck.

But, as McCarthy explains, the text isn’t out of the trial completely. It’s been presented in court, and Judge Cooper is permitting prosecutors to say it’s strong evidence that Baker’s memory is correct when he says Sussmann told him in his office that he wasn’t there on behalf of clients. What prosecutors can’t do is tell the jury that the Sussman’s text alone provides the proof he was lying (EVEN THOUGH IT DOES). Got that?

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/michael-sussmann-john-durham-fbi-trial

Unlike the text, Sussmann’s verbal lie is one man’s word against another’s. It was said with no witnesses and no notes taken. Baker said under oath that he’s 100 percent sure Sussmann said it, but other statements have been inconsistent, and Sussmann has pleaded ‘not guilty.” If it’s just a matter of who’s more believable, this jury is filled with DC Democrats who want to believe Sussmann. After all, he was just trying to save us from Trump!

Nick Arama at RedState.com had a similar take on what the judge did, even linking to McCarthy’s analysis. This judge has taken a case that should be simple and cut-and-dried, with the proof RIGHT THERE, and made it as hard to convict as he can. He wouldn’t even allow the tweets from Hillary that show how she capitalized with lightning speed on the Alfa Bank hoax. Judge Cooper was wrong not to recuse himself from this case; we’ve addressed his conflicts before and they are staggering.

Then there’s the jury. As Jonathan Turley has noted, “I mean, he [Durham] is facing a jury that has three Clinton donors, an AOC donor, and a woman whose daughter is on the same sports team as Sussmann’s daughter. With the exception of randomly selecting people out of the DNC headquarters, you could not come up with a worse jury.”

Between this judge and this jury, one might be reminded of the O.J. Simpson trial, except with Judge Ito replaced by Al Cowlings.

https://heavy.com/entertainment/2016/06/al-cowlings-oj-simpson-now-wife-today-murder-trial-white-bronco/

The media no doubt sense that this jury will acquit Sussmann no matter how strong the case against him, and that’s why they’re laying low right now. If he’s acquitted –- and the verdict might come as early as today –- they’ll spring into action and use the verdict to trash the whole Durham investigation, never mind what it has found.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/05/26/judge-just-threw-another-roadblock-into-durhams-case-against-sussmann-n570655

And Durham continues to find a lot. Testimony from Wednesday revealed that Rodney Joffe was actually the same source for two separate “tips” that falsely connected Trump and Alfa Bank. So he needed Sussmann to lie and say he wasn’t approaching Baker on behalf of clients, so he, Joffe, could still hand off his phony evidence to other people in the FBI. Joffe himself was apparently (surprise) an FBI confidential human source. This is one more reason for Sussmann to lie.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/26/court-testimony-shows-spygate-conspirators-deceived-the-fbi-using-same-strategy-twice/

Finally, while we wait for the verdict, here’s an excellent review of the Sussmann trial thus far. It calls the trial “part of a three-ring circus, showcasing sleazy political enablers, malfeasance by public officials and biased reporting.” We have to “walk behind the elephants with a huge shovel.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sussmann-trial-exposes-dems-scandal-industrial-process/ar-AAXLrMH

Colonel Kenneth Allard, Guest Columnist

This Memorial Day may be a good time for Americans to ask ourselves: Do we still deserve our freedom? I’m not talking about our slumping economy nor even descrying our media’s unblinking distortion of issues from our porous southern border to the perfidy of Hillary Clinton. But today we are seeing the tumultuous confluence of two basic decisions reached nearly 50 years ago: the “right” of abortion decided by Roe v Wade in 1973; and the adoption of the All-Volunteer Force (AVF) in 1974. While each choice was made separately, their protagonists could hardly have imagined how those separate choices would evolve to create twin challenges to our way of life.  

Mike Huckabee

On Tuesday, Day 7 of the Michael Sussmann trial, FBI agent Curtis Heide shed light on how Bureau officials got the idea that Sussmann’s “evidence” about the phony Alfa Bank scandal came from the ‘Justice’ Department.

He said it was his own fault.

In a document drafted the day of Sussmann’s visit by Heide and fellow agent Allison Sands, he said “the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE provided the FBI with a white paper that was produced by an anonymous third party.” This document served as confirmation that an investigation had been opened into the later-debunked allegation.

Heide said the DOJ reference was “a mistake in our paperwork.”

Quite a mistake. When asked by the prosecution how it could’ve been made, Heide said, “I honestly don’t know.”

Recall Monday’s testimony, in which another agent, Ryan Gaynor, testified that the Bureau was shielding Sussmann’s identity from investigating agents, in a procedure called “close hold.” Though this is often considered appropriate, field investigators for this case were frustrated that they couldn’t know the identity. So for all they knew, it WAS the Department of ‘Justice’ that delivered the goods, not just some “anonymous third party,” and such a misinterpretation surely influenced the way they handled the evidence.

Text messages introduced by the prosecution underscore this problem. “We really want to interview the source of all this information,” Heide wrote to Gaynor on October 3. “Any way we can track down who the guy is and how we’re getting this information?”

There wasn’t. They were flying blind. Gaynor told him only that headquarters was looking at it.

Heide happens to be the subject of an internal FBI “investigative inquiry” for allegedly “not identifying exculpatory information as it pertained to one of the Crossfire Hurricane investigations.” His case is still pending. The allegation involves classified information that was left off a FISA application for a warrant to spy. When asked by the prosecution on Tuesday if he’d intentionally withheld such evidence from the Crossfire Hurricane team, he denied that.

Recall that FBI official Kevin Clinesmith was charged and pleaded guilty to altering a document used in the FISA application for a surveillance warrant on Carter Page. We don’t know if the allegation against Heide applies to the same application.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/24/fbi-agent-testifies-in-michael-sussman-trial-about-mistake/

There’s something important to note in the earlier testimony given by Robby Mook, about Hillary personally green-lighting the plan to break the unverified Alfa Bank story in the media. Jim Trusty, a former ‘Justice’ Department official who’s now a DC lawyer, explained to the NEW YORK POST that this fits with other testimony from Mook and Marc Elias saying they were unaware Sussmann planned to also take it to the FBI. Trusty calls this strategy “Protect the Queen.” As in, Queen Hillary. It goes like this:

First, as we’ve said, taking phony evidence to the FBI to gin up an investigation of a political opponent –- or of anyone –- is very serious. It’s a crime, whereas taking it to the media might just be called “political dirty tricks,” completely unethical but not necessarily leading to a perp-walk. Hillary’s accomplices need to keep her out of jail. So by admitting she knew they leaked to the MEDIA, as opposed to the FBI, they’ve gone just to the line, admitting what they have to, but stopping there.

Trusty said Mook and Elias have suggested Hillary was “shocked, shocked by Sussmann going to the FBI.”

We don’t buy it. It makes no sense for Sussmann to GO BEHIND HER BACK to the FBI and then bill her for the meeting!

Trusty put it similarly: “Legal representation simply does not work that way. You don’t ‘free-lance’ a visit to the FBI while billing your client for the time.”

So Mook and Elias can stick to their untenable story and pretend she wasn’t aware, but we know she was. Still, this tenuous testimony might work, especially if Sussmann’s case is being heard by a custom-made equivalent of the O.J. jury. All they need is one excuse, however feeble, to let him off. Heck, maybe billing Hillary was just a mistake in the paperwork. Yeah, that’s the ticket.

Trusty called it “a fig leaf [for] any partisan jurors who want to acquit.”

But only those in an extreme state of partisan denial will still believe Hillary wasn’t behind that little trip to the FBI.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/22/clinton-campaign-aides-try-to-protect-the-queen-at-sussmann-trial/

TechnoFog is doing some outstanding summaries of the testimony, and for Tuesday, he starts with Trisha Anderson, who in 2016 was an FBI general counsel reporting directly to James Baker. She’s asked to read her memo from Sussmann’s visit, which says, “No specific client, but group of cyber academics talked with him about research.”

Then Anderson is presented with an email dated June 16, 2016, concerning a meeting to be held later that day and including SUSSMANN, the CEO of the DNC, James Trainor of the FBI’s Cyber Division, and SHAWN HENRY of CrowdStrike. This meeting takes place two days after the June 14 announcement by the DNC that it had been a victim of Russian hacking and over a month before the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) said it, too, had been hacked by Russians.

Soooo...Durham appears to be going somewhere with the story about the DNC’s Russian “hack” and CrowdStrike. As you know, CrowdStrike never turned over the DNC hard drive to the FBI, and the FBI, amazingly, never pressed them about it. To this day, there’s been no evidence that Russia hacked the DNC, or the DCCC. Someone gave the emails to WikiLeaks, but Julian Assange maintains it was not Russia, or any “state actor.” Yet the “Russian hack” was used to help validate the false Trump-Russia “collusion” story. Sussmann is a common element.

TechnoFog also has more very interesting detail on Heide’s testimony. Heide said Bill Priestap (he of the curious memory lapses on Monday) had made it clear, the FBI’s 7^th Floor –- including Director Jim Comey –- was demanding a full field investigation be opened. Heide viewed this as inappropriate, but it was “not an option.”

“In order to open a full field investigation,” Heide said, “we would need specific and articulable facts that a threat to U.S. national security has occurred or there’s been a violation of federal law.” But they were ordered to do it anyway, when nothing was found to substantiate the allegations in the Alfa Bank “white paper,”

Heide also testified that there was another confidential human source besides Sussmann supporting the Alfa Bank story. But this was apparently a media person (!), not a cyber expert. TechnoFog speculates that it was David Corn.

Next witness: Jared Novich, former business partner of Rodney Joffe. He testified that Joffe called and asked him to research some information regarding Trump and Russia. He did it, but said he’d never been asked to do something “very political” like this –- it “felt like opposition research.” The project was called “Crimson Rhino” and involved a list of names, home addresses, spouses, workplaces and personal email addresses. Carter Page’s name was on it. Joffe wanted “a 90-day history of data.” Spying, straight up.

https://technofog.substack.com/p/how-fbi-hq-hamstrung-the-alfa-bank?token

This is getting more fascinating by the day.

Mike Huckabee

Today is Primary Election day in Georgia, Arkansas and Alabama, plus there’s a House Special Election in Minnesota and primary runoff elections in Texas. Be sure to vote, and I’ll have a roundup of the results tomorrow (at least, those that are in by tomorrow.)

For a list of my Arkansas endorsements through my political organization, Huck PAC, go here.

For my Georgia endorsements, go here.

For my Alabama endorsements, go here.

A couple of races of particular note: In the Texas Attorney General run-off, incumbent Ken Paxton is facing George P. Bush in a race that’s being framed as a test of the Bush dynasty’s ability to survive in the MAGA era. And in Georgia, Gov. Brian Kemp is being challenged by David Perdue, who is backed by Donald Trump because Trump thinks Kemp didn’t do enough to challenge the 2020 vote. 

Here’s some more info on these and other races in these states, plus the potential impact of Trump’s endorsements.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-ballot-looms-large-tuesday-primaries-georgia-alabama-arkansas-texas

Sadly for Georgia Democrats, they have no choice in the Governor’s race because Stacey Abrams is running unopposed. Just think of that: Stacey Abrams is literally the best the Democrats could do!

Today would be a great time for her to face a challenger because last week, she publicly griped that she was sick of hearing about how Georgia is the best state to do business when it’s the worst state to live in (I guess all the New Yorkers who are fleeing there must be masochists.) Also, as I previously reported, the massive surge in early voting has proven that Abrams’ claims about Georgia’s new election integrity laws being Jim Crow-style racist voter suppression – a claim echoed by the media, President Biden, and major corporations and that cost Georgians hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenues – was, as I've said from day one, a scurrilous and very expensive lie.

As of the end of early voting on Friday, over 850,000 Georgians had cast early or absentee ballots, which is more than triple the number in 2018.

https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2022/05/24/the-morning-briefing-democrats-georgia-lies-are-being-laid-bare-n1600298

And it’s not just white Republicans who are finding it easy to vote. One 70-year-old black woman told the Washington Post, "I had heard that they were going to try to deter us in any way possible because of the fact that we didn’t go Republican on the last election, when Trump didn’t win. To go in there and vote as easily as I did and to be treated with the respect that I knew I deserved as an American citizen — I was really thrown back." Shame on the people who made her believe that about her fellow Georgians.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/georgia-voting-law-media-jim-crow-accusations

In summation, Stacey Abrams told a “Big Lie” that the 2018 election she lost was rigged; she intentionally inflamed racial divisions; and she frightened the public and undermined our democracy by shattering the people’s faith in the integrity of their elections. Aren’t those all the same charges that the Democrats are falsely making against Trump as an argument for banning him from office for life? Yet Abrams has done them all openly for nearly four years, and it made her wealthy, a Democrat Party/Hollywood celebrity, and now they want her to be Governor of Georgia. Once again, if it weren’t for double standards, they’d have no standards at all.

I just hope that in November, Georgians will use their new system of easier but more transparent voting to deliver a well-deserved heavy loss to Stacey Abrams. Maybe if it’s a crushing landslide defeat, it will finally be enough to make her go away – or at least stop claiming she actually won.

Mike Huckabee

I can’t imagine how you make a call like this, but both Democratic pollster John Zogby and conservative poll analyst Jed Babbin agree that last week was the worst week of the Biden Presidency so far.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/white-house-report-card-zogby-declares-worst-week-d

The baby formula shortage worsened, the stock market continued its biggest fall in years, inflation kept raging with gas prices setting new records every day, Biden’s new press secretary debuted to bad reviews, his Ministry of Truth scheme imploded amid bipartisan outrage, and a federal judge blocked Biden’s plans to lift the Title 42 COVID protections on illegal border crossers, a decision that critics on both side of the aisle saw as an impending disaster.

That Zogby poll had Biden’s approval rating at 41%, which is actually better than the latest AP/NORC poll, which has him down at 39%.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/bidens-approval-dips-to-lowest-of-presidency-ap-norc-poll/ar-AAXvTxk?ocid=BingNews

What’s interesting about these polls is the internal details. As pathetic as 39% approval is, it’s only that high because of the loyalty of Democrats and African-Americans. Biden’s support among Hispanics has crashed to the mid-20s, but blacks and Democrats have adamantly continued to show the kind of monolithic support that can only be explained by sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting, “La-la-la, I can’t hear you!”

But lately, things under Biden have gotten so bad that it’s becoming impossible even for his most self-deluded supporters to keep kidding themselves. The AP poll found that his support among Democrats that’s never before dropped below 82% has fallen to 73%. Even those who still support him admit that everything’s going badly but claim he’s not to blame for it (Biden obviously agrees with them on that point.) But at least some are finally starting to crumble under the weight of reality.

A recent Rasmussen poll found that Biden’s support among black voters is down to 64%. More ominous are the numbers of those who want him to run again. His supporters can pretend to think he’s doing a good job, but when asked if they want him to keep doing it, they scream, “NO!!” This poll found that only 39% of blacks, 31% of Hispanics and 26% of women (all among his strongest support groups) want him to run for reelection.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/2024-shock-biden-36-trump-50

(That same poll also found that in a potential 2024 rematch, Trump leads Biden by 50-36%.)

And a CBS Poll has more bad news for Biden, with staggering numbers of people pessimistic about the economy and about half of black respondents saying he’s “slow to react.”

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/05/22/new-cbs-poll-is-damning-indictment-of-biden-while-official-offers-up-a-feeble-response-n568323

It seems obvious that the biggest obstacle for Republicans to overcome is the long-engrained, media-defended notion spread by the left that Republicans are scary, racist fascists. But seldom has any group of voters had a starker example of the real difference between Republican and Democrat policies than living in 2018 (pre-COVID Trump America) and 2022 (post-COVID Biden America.)

A good example of how hard this mindset is to counter is Bill Maher, who for all his recent red-pilling still hasn’t shaken off the liberal brainwashing. Last week, he reacted to Elon Musk's decision to vote Republican for the first time by claiming that for all the Dems’ faults, the Republicans are still the most dangerous party.

Really, Bill? And what would happen if Republicans regained power? Would we take away people’s Constitutional rights, create Orwellian government agencies to police speech, jail people without charges, monitor citizens through social media, explode the national debt, crash the stock market, open up our borders to drug dealers and sex traffickers, allow a massive surge of crime in our cities, put violent criminals back on the streets while tying the cops' hands (basically, turn America into Gotham City), empower our enemies abroad, send our troops to places they have no business going, and make the basic necessities of life unavailable and/or unaffordable?

Because in case you haven’t noticed, that’s the Democratic Party’s current platform.

Mike Huckabee

Speaking of large organizations that want to go around parents to indoctrinate small children, State Farm’s “Corporate Responsibility Analyst” (and boy, does he have the wrong job title) put out a memo touting the insurance giant’s partnership with a group called the “GenderCool Project.” It was to have 500 State Farm agents and employees donate a three-book bundle about Being Transgender, Inclusive and Non-Binary to their “local teacher, community center or library of their choice.” The goal was to “increase representation of LGBTQ+ books and support our communities in having challenging, empowering, and important conversations with children Age 5+.” Yes, that’s correct: AGE FIVE and up.

https://redstate.com/jenvanlaar/2022/05/23/breaking-state-farm-terminates-partnership-with-gendercool-according-to-internal-memo-n568913

The news sparked predictable outrage not only from parents and State Farm customers but from many agents and employees who didn’t appreciate being turned into spreaders of radical LGBTQ propaganda. The story hit the news like a shovelful of manure hitting a ceiling fan, and not desiring to “get woke and go broke,” State Farm rushed to do damage control. They announced that the memo came from “a mid-to-lower level employee in Florida” who doesn’t speak for the company, adding:

“Conversations about gender and identity should happen at home with parents. We don’t support requiring curriculum in schools on this topic. We support organizations providing resources for parents to have these conversations. We will no longer support that program.”

Pretty simple, isn’t it? Companies that want to stay in business concentrate on their corporate mission, stay out of radical political and social issues, and let parents raise their own kids.

Take note, Disney Corp. In fact, take a lot of notes.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/05/20/disney-releases-lgbtq-pride-themed-toys-marketed-to-children/

Mike Huckabee

During the George Floyd riots, corporations frightened of being tagged as racist plastered the BLM logo on every available surface and showered millions of dollars on Black Lives Matter, without giving a thought to what it would be used for. I’m sure they had some vague notion that it would help black communities. It’s been reported that BLM took in over $90 million and sent over $21 million to local BLM chapters, but black community leaders complained that not a dime has been given to help neighborhoods destroyed by riots and crime. BLM has come under increasing scrutiny, and it’s not pretty.

BLM’s founders seem to be more interested in buying pricey real estate than helping minority neighborhoods, and their failure to comply with laws governing nonprofits has led to several states launching investigations (even California!) The latest state to demand accountability is Indiana, whose attorney general filed a lawsuit against BLM, saying it’s critical to protect Indiana consumers “from this house of cards.” I suppose they could argue that they’re hardly a "nonprofit," but that’s not a legal defense.

https://www.westernjournal.com/state-ag-files-suit-blm-protecting-indiana-consumers-house-cards-critical/

Now, at last, the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation has finally released its first financial disclosure statement, and it’s only raising more questions. For instance, the group’s largest payout was over $2.1 million to a consulting firm owned by one of its board members. The second-biggest was over $969,000 for “live production, design and media” paid to a company owned by the father of BLM co-founder Patrice Cullors’ baby. Other expenses included $709,190 for “communications, IT and digital,” $696,364 to a Los Angeles-based company for “media planning and placement,” and $504,000 to Resistance Labs in Oakland for “tech support.” I wonder how many black lives those expenditures saved. By comparison, BLM gave only $200,000 to the Trayvon Martin Foundation that helps families of kids who are victims of gun violence.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/17/blm-paid-co-founders-baby-daddy-far-more-than-trayvon-martin-group/

The director of the watchdog group Charity Watch said BLM “had no whistleblower policy, no document destruction and retention policy, and only one board member during the financial reporting period. It reports having and regularly monitoring and enforcing a written conflict of interest policy, but…one person can’t monitor and enforce a conflict of interest policy over themselves. It’s frightening, isn’t it, to consider that this much taxpayer-subsidized public money was being overseen by only one person?”

While I can abhor BLM’s sleazy financial tactics and condemn the way they’ve exploited and inflamed racial divisions to enrich themselves, I have a hard time working up much sympathy for the people who gladly handed over their money. There are many reputable charities and religious organizations that genuinely help people, and with very low overhead. BLM just understood their target audience: guilty white liberals who think you solve every problem by throwing money at it. They were geniuses at making it appear that they were the place where liberals should throw their money. At least for once, they were throwing away their own money and not the taxpayers’.

Mike Huckabee

Mike Huckabee

As promised, here’s more perspective on what happened last week in the Michael Sussmann trial and its significance going into Week 2.

There were more witnesses called to testify on Friday than just the “stars,” former FBI General Counsel James Baker and Hillary For America chairman Robby Mook. But Mook’s revelation –- that not only was Hillary told of the phony Alfa Bank story and warned it was unverified but also that she personally gave the go-ahead --- garnered so much richly-deserved attention that we’re only now getting to the others.

Two former CIA employees testified on Friday, and they supported Special Counsel Durham’s point that Sussmann’s deception was part of a “pattern.” In other words, Sussmann didn’t just figure on lying that one time to James Baker and the FBI about not representing any clients during his visit. Months later, he told these two CIA employees the same lie.

The two, identified in court only as Kevin P. and Steve M., testified that in February 2017 –- after Trump had become President –- Sussmann came to CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia, and gave them two thumb drives, just as he had to Baker at the FBI back in September. Kevin P. testified that Sussmann told them he was “not representing any client.” Sussmann said the thumb drives, from a couple of unidentified “contacts,” showed a secret cyber back-channel between a Trump Organization server and one belonging to Russia-linked Alfa Bank.

Steve M. drafted a memo after their meeting, summarizing what had taken place and noting that Sussmann had been there on behalf of a client. The memo was shown to jurors. But Kevin P. edited the memo to change “client” to “contacts.” That version was also shown.

Sussmann also told them he'd taken “similar but unrelated” information to the FBI. (Never mind that the FBI had essentially dismissed his “evidence” the first day and later had found the story in the “white papers” to be unsupported by the data.)

Now-retired CIA official Mark Chadason, who’d been station chief in Europe and North Africa, also testified, saying that Sussmann had reached out to him and told him he had information relating to a matter of “national security” that he'd tried to get to them through the CIA general counsel. Chadason met with him at a Northern Virginia motel on January 31, 2017 –- again, after Trump was President –- at the request of a mutual friend. It appears that Sussmann couldn’t keep his story straight; he told Chadason he did have a client, but that his client was a Republican. Oh, and he wasn’t sure if his REPUBLICAN client would reveal himself to the CIA.

That might be an even more outrageous lie, as I’d be very surprised if “ultra-Democrat” Perkins Coie, the firm that represented both Hillary For America and the DNC, has represented any Republicans at all, EVER. (Well, maybe the Adam Kinzinger- or Liz Cheney-types, but those don't count.) No, Sussmann was just telling another version of the lie. And the lie absolutely was “material” (the magic word in a case about lying), as Baker has testified that the FBI would have subjected Sussmann’s evidence to more scrutiny if he’d told them it was from a client.

In fact, Baker testified that if he’d known Sussmann was pushing the Alfa Bank story on behalf of a client, he would’ve said, “If you’re meeting on behalf of Clinton, you shouldn’t come see me.” He told the court, “I was willing to meet with Michael alone because I had high confidence in him and trust. I think I would have made a different assessment if he said he had been appearing on behalf of a client.”

Jerry Dunleavy at the WASHINGTON EXAMINER has more of his testimony about that very important issue.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/baker-wouldnt-have-met-with-sussmann-if-he-admitted-he-was-representing-clinton

As for Chadason, when cross-examined by the defense, he said Sussmann had seemed “frustrated” that he hadn’t been able to interest the feds. Sussmann had said during their meeting that if the CIA didn’t pursue this, he’d take it to THE NEW YORK TIMES. Chadason didn’t take that as a threat, he told the jury, but as more of an act of desperation.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/20/clinton-lawyer-shopped-phony-trump-russia-data-to-cia-in-17-witnesses/

As Nick Arama at RedState reports, the Sussmann defense has tried to portray his lie as just a random “one-off,” not part of a deliberate scheme to mislead. But now we know: lying about not representing any client was part of his plan, because he did it repeatedly.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/05/21/sussmann-defense-takes-another-hit-with-testimony-of-cia-employees-n567895

Friday, Baker said there was something else Sussmann never told the FBI: that a “white paper” he was passing along about Alfa Bank was prepared by Fusion GPS, the same company behind the Steele “dossier.” Baker said this knowledge would’ve caused him to treat the evidence differently, as it would’ve raised fears that “the FBI was being pulled into some kind of political agenda –- a political ploy.” It would have led to “serious conversations,” he said, among top leadership about “what, if anything, to do with this material and how to handle it.”

“It would have raised in my mind the concern about, ‘Wait a minute; he also does, in other matters, represent the [DNC] and the Clinton campaign,’” Baker testified. “‘Is that what’s going on here?’”

https://nypost.com/2022/05/20/hillary-clinton-lawyer-michael-sussmann-hid-more-fbi-official/?utm_campaign

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL published an editorial on Friday called “Hillary Clinton Did It.” Subhead: “Her 2016 campaign manager says she approved a plan to plant a false Russia claim with a reporter.” The WSJ is by subscription, but even if you don’t subscribe, the link will take you to an excerpt of the “Journal Editorial Report,” featuring Kim Strassel summarizing the “depth and the breadth” of what Durham has exposed and explaining why he might have chosen not to go further with wider conspiracy charges in this DC courtroom. His primary goal, she says, is to tell the story, and he certainly has.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-did-it-robby-mook-michael-sussmann-donald-trump-russia-collusion-alfa-bank-11653084709

One’s first thought reading that headline might be, “She did it? Did what?" After all, Hillary has done so many bad things over the years. (As Monica Crowley said to Steve Hilton on THE NEXT REVOLUTION Sunday night, “Mrs. Clinton has been a dark menace on the political landscape for 40 years, so the depths of her deceit and corruption know no bounds.”) But thanks to this seemingly interminable investigation that was well worth the wait, we know she personally gave the order to frame her political opponent in 2016.

The “money paragraph” from the WSJ editorial has been thoughtfully passed along by THE DAILY CALLER. A must-read.

https://dailycaller.com/2022/05/22/wall-street-journal-russia-trump-clinton-durham/

Finally, for when you have time, it’s fun to go back and read Paul Sperry’s report from January, detailing what we knew (unofficially) then about Hillary’s role in spreading fake Trump-Russia connections. It wasn’t just the Alfa Bank hoax; it was the “dossier,” too. And Obama had been advised of this. It started as a distraction from Hillary’s own scandal and WikiLeaks’ publishing of those damaging DNC emails, which we still don’t know were a Russian hack, regardless of the Democrats’ insistence. They’ve lied so much; what makes anyone think this particular claim is true?

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/01/27/what_did_clinton_know_about_the_russiagate_smear_and_when_did_she_know_it_the_evidence_builds_813739.html

Mike Huckabee

Blessings on you and your family, and from all the Huckabee staff! Today's newsletter includes:

• Sussmann trial, Day 5: Hillary implicated in bogus Alfa Bank
• The Democrats' fraudulent claims
• And much more...

Sincerely,

Mike Huckabee

1. DAILY BIBLE VERSE

Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 5:3

If you have a favorite Bible Verse you want to see in one of our newsletters, please email [email protected]

2. New Warner Brothers boss wants Rowling back

There have been a number of good omens recently that the American people are fed up with a tiny mob of loudmouthed leftists on Twitter terrorizing corporations into adopting their deranged political views, and the customer backlash is forcing CEOs to grow a spine. From the rapid decline of Disney’s popularity to Netflix telling its whiny “social justice warrior” employees that maybe they need to find someplace else to work, things are looking up for a return to common sense, neutral corporations and non-propagandistic entertainment.

And now, here’s another good sign: the new boss of Warner Brothers, David Zaslav, not only canceled CNN+, he’s uncanceled J.K. Rowling. The Wall Street Journal reports that he’s meeting with the author to discuss new “Harry Potter” projects.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/19/hurrah-for-new-hbo-boss-for-uncanceling-j-k-rowling/

This has meaning beyond a simple movie/TV deal. Rowling has been “unpersoned” by the cancel culture mob for daring to oppose the erasure of women and allowing men who “identify” as women to invade women’s private spaces and take over their sports. She’s always been a feminist and supporter of liberal causes, but for that single thought crime against trans dogma, she’s been eviscerated online, and her name and image magically vanished from properties she created. In a disgusting act of betrayal, even the young stars of the “Harry Potter” movies, who owe their fame and fortune to Rowling, joined in on the attacks and shunning.

But Zaslav, who apparently believes it’s his job to produce programming that people want to see rather than what far-left wackos think they ought to see, is ignoring the Internet “OUTRAGE!” and wants Rowling back. This is good news for her, for society in general, and for the chances of there actually being something to watch other than badly-written shows filled with heavy-handed leftist messages. That tends to happen when writers are hired for their talent and imagination rather than how many identity politics boxes they check.

3. The “Federal Firearms Licensing Act.”

In their never-ending efforts to exploit tragedies to pass ineffective legislation, House Democrats on Thursday used the Buffalo shooting as justification to introduce a new gun control bill called the “Federal Firearms Licensing Act.”

https://www.westernjournal.com/red-alert-breaking-dem-legislation-end-gun-sales-current-firearm-owners-forever-require-doj-license/

It would criminalize every gun owner in America by converting your Second Amendment right to bear arms into a privilege for which you’d have to get a license from the Department of Justice for every gun you buy. The DOJ could reject your application at its discretion, even if you’ve never committed a crime.

This is in spite of the fact that, like almost every other mass shooting used as a pretext to push gun control, there were already gun laws in place that didn’t stop the shooter in Buffalo, and this one wouldn’t have, either.

I’m not too worried about this becoming law because it’s blatantly unconstitutional and it could never garner enough support to pass the Senate. But it is important to talk about because this is what the Democrats are prioritizing and what they’ll be running on in November: that they tried to “do something” to stop mass shootings, but the gun-loving Republicans stopped them because they…like mass shootings?

Translation: They will continue to ignore the real problems that lead to these atrocities and focus on disarming law abiding citizens – who, thanks to their policies of releasing criminals onto the streets while defunding police, need firearms to protect their families more than ever. They will do this while ensuring that they always have plenty of armed security to protect them and their families. And they will never stop pushing the same restrictive policies, no matter how many times they prove useless.

One example: President Biden recently declared that we need an “assault weapons” ban. He said we did it before and we can do it again. He is right that we did it before. But Congress allowed the ban to expire because it made no difference in crime stats. Like so many other Democrat policies, it didn’t work, so let’s bring it back and try it one more time.

4. “Cruel Summer”

In a report titled “Cruel Summer,” J.P. Morgan predicts that by August, the average national price of a gallon of gas could be $6.20.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/05/19/j-p-morgan-predicts-cruel-summer-of-gas-prices-above-6/

The only upside of that is that prices will likely be even higher in blue states, so maybe residents won’t be able to afford to drive U-Hauls to red states and will finally start voting out the people who caused this.

Even if you have to take a staycation at home, it might not be so comfortable. The North American Electric Reliability Corp. is warning of blackouts this summer, especially in the West and Midwest. The predictable reason (predictable for everyone other than the people in the White House who caused it) is that their war on fossil fuels has forced the closure of gas-fueled power plants and there aren’t enough “green energy” sources to replace them.

https://www.westernjournal.com/energy-officials-issue-sobering-warning-widespread-summer-blackouts-triggered-closure-fossil-fuel-plants/

Some people are saying this Administration is a joke, but if so, it’s this joke: “What did socialists use for light before candles? Electricity.”

5. It isn't all bad news

I sometimes feel as if I should apologize for having to report so much bad news. I know it can be overwhelming to have to read so much of it. Believe me, it’s hard on me and my staff, as well. That’s why we say, “We read the news so you won’t have to!” There’s so much depressing news that it can really get you down if you let it. So we also try to report good news to uplift you and positive signs that things are turning around to help you stay optimistic that better times are ahead.

Like a new Quinnipiac poll showing that all the race-baiting and divisiveness isn’t working, and that Biden’s approval rating among Hispanics has plummeted from 55 to 26%. That’s even lower than his 32% approval among whites. See, there are things that people of all races can agree on.

https://www.westernjournal.com/bidens-approval-rating-hispanics-plummets-pitiful-new-low-worse-demographic/

It’s also important to remember that despite the left’s attempts to politicize everything, most people aren’t obsessed with politics and just get annoyed with people who are. There are many other things in the world to think about.

To help make that point, I’d like to share a new music video with you by a wonderful female harmony bluegrass/gospel/swing group called the Smith Sisters with the Sunday Drivers.

https://youtu.be/jP9Sm-OaiSc

It’s called “Around the Bend,” and it’s not only a catchy song, it also has an important message. I’ll let the writer, Kelli Lewis, put it in her own words that she shared with one of my writers, who is a friend:

“I just wanted to show that although you may lose everything, good things are always around the bend. Good simple things...love of God...family...friends...animals... I told my sister the story is simple but it makes your heart happy.

The song on our music video was originally my story. One about losing my job, house and a friend. I suffered depression, but it turned around. I wrote this song with a goal in mind to help others. Fast forward...my niece (she is in our video) is a survivor of domestic abuse. This song has now become her story.

She too lost everything, of course in different ways. She can’t teach because of brain injuries, she had to sell her home etc. She is writing a book about her experience…She wants to share her story…

So the next time you look at the video, imagine at the beginning it saying, ‘I am Cayla...I am a survivor of domestic violence...’”

Kelli, it’s a great song, and Cayla, my hopes and prayers are with you. You’re both great examples of how there are Huck’s Heroes all around us working to help make things better for others. You’re the antidote for the depression some people spread by trying to drag us all down.

6. Sussmann trial, Day 5: Hillary implicated in bogus Alfa Bank

“I guess right now, Hillary’s best defense is a DC jury, an Obama-appointed judge, and the media. Otherwise, she’s got a lot of exposure.”

--- Victor David Hanson

Well, that’s exactly what her flak Michael Sussmann has going for him right now, on trial for lying to the FBI. He can thank his lucky stars that his case has been brought before a DC jury and an Obama-appointed district judge, Christopher Cooper –- whose wife, unbelievably, has even represented big-time Crossfire Hurricane player Lisa Page –- and with a media that for the most part are completely ignoring it.

But as of Friday’s testimony by former Hillary For America chairman Robby Mook, Hillary does indeed have exposure. I wish we could’ve been there in the courtroom when he apparently surprised everyone by candidly admitting Hillary had known about the Alfa Bank scam and had personally given the go-ahead to give it to SLATE magazine, though they told her it hadn’t been verified. As always, when it comes to scandal, all roads lead to Hillary.

Former acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker, appearing with Will Cain on Friday’s TUCKER CARLSON TONIGHT, said there were two reasons why this trial is so important: 1) upholding the rule of law in holding someone accountable for lying to the FBI, and 2) telling the story of what the Clinton campaign did in spreading disinformation (the actual kind). And now, with Mook’s testimony, it’s not just the Clinton campaign --- it’s Hillary Clinton herself.

As for where the trial goes from here, Whitaker said it goes to a “broader group” of individuals who were involved in creating this fake story to tantalize the FBI and media --- members of the “joint venture” (actually a criminal conspiracy) tasked with executing the “October surprise” plan. He anticipated that it would “continue to go slow” but would “intentionally try to cast a net that’s broader than just Michael Sussmann.”

Will that net be cast wide enough to catch Hillary in it? Whitaker didn’t say she’d necessarily be perp-walked, much as she might deserve it, but in his view, after Mooks’ testimony that Hillary herself told them to share this story with the media, and knowing these are the same media people who bought the “Russian disinformation” lie about Hunter Biden’s laptop, the case Durham is making will be “a statement that this kind of lying to the American people is over.”

We’ve had the impression that this judge was trying his hardest to keep out evidence that might tie Hillary personally to the Alfa Bank scam. Mook’s glib testimony about Hillary’s participation reportedly surprised attorneys on both sides. I’ll bet it surprised the judge, too. Trump attorney Alina Habba, who was there, said it “was amazing.”

“I’ve never heard so many pens click, and start immediately writing,” she told Jason Chaffetz Friday evening. “[Mook] just cut it right to the top.” She’s been really impressed with Durham’s team, calling them articulate and brief. Sussmann’s attorneys, she said, sometimes came across as angry and defensive, trying to intimidate Baker when his testimony damaged their client.

She says “the jury is a Washington jury,” and we won’t know how they’re processing this till the verdict is read. But the story as presented in the courtroom –- “that they misled, they obstructed justice, and the entire FBI was in on it,” along with the campaign and the DNC –- is clear.

As for that jury, Jonathan Turley told FOX News that it is “a nightmare.” Imagine the most politicized jury ever, and then make it worse. It’s the O.J. jury of juries. It actually includes not just Hillary voters but Hillary DONORS. And the judge has denied Durham’s motions to dismiss jurors with other clear conflicts. “So, I think for the prosecutors,” Turley said, “it seems like the only thing that is missing on the jury is Chelsea Clinton.”

What, was Chelsea not available?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/turley-jury-pool-michael-sussmann-trial-nightmare-prosecutors

This doesn’t mean the jurors are necessarily going to be biased. The evidence against Sussmann truly is overwhelming. But now that Hillary has been drawn in –- they’d been told this case wasn’t going to involve Hillary and politics –- some jurors who first thought they could be impartial might not be after all.

Regarding Hillary, Mook testified she didn’t want to go to the FBI with the Alfa Bank story because she distrusted then-FBI Director James Comey. He said that “two or three of the most dangerous days of the campaign” were brought about by Comey. (Note: Remember, though, Comey is also the one who made it possible for her scandal-ridden campaign to continue, with his ridiculous statement on July 5, 2016, that “no reasonable prosecutor” would prosecute her for mishandling classified material.)

Mook made the surprise admission about Hillary in response to a question by the defense, who is from the Democrat-connected firm of Latham and Watkins and obviously is trying to keep Hillary at a safe distance from Sussmann’s FBI dealings. If she could be tied directly to the plan to weaponize the FBI against her political opponent, that would be very serious. Turley wondered why the defense put Mook on the stand.

We have a question ourselves: If Hillary distrusted Comey and the FBI so much, the attorney for her campaign surely knew this. Why did he make such an effort to get them involved against her wishes? It doesn’t make sense. He went behind his client’s back and then billed her for it? Not buying it.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/clinton-team-did-not-trust-fbi-2016-comey-mook-testimony-sussmann-trial

Another thing that doesn’t make sense: Mook cited Comey’s opening of the “Mid-Year Exam” investigation into Hillary on October 28, 2016, as a reason Hillary didn’t trust Comey and the FBI. But that was AFTER Sussmann took the Alfa Bank story to the FBI, so how could it have had any bearing on her reluctance to do that? Sussmann’s meeting with Baker was in September.

Incidentally, that last-minute investigation by Comey is one of many reasons/excuses Hillary has given for losing the election. “If the election were on October 27, I’d be your President,” she said in May of 2017.

Since Hillary’s tweet about the Alfa Bank story is extremely relevant now, the prosecution moved to have it admitted into evidence, despite the judge’s refusal to do so last month. On Friday, Judge Cooper granted the motion. (This is the tweet that includes a statement from Jake Sullivan, complete with outrageously bogus bullet points. Sullivan is the individual we’re supposed to trust now as White House national security adviser.)

On Friday, Mook defended that tweet, saying, “I did not see it as some sort of silver bullet, and I don’t think others on the campaign did, either.” Well, whether they did or not, they sure put a lot of effort into creating and pushing that story. Obviously, though, it was just part of a larger scheme. After all, they had the “dossier.”

…………….

We’ll have more analysis leading into Monday’s testimony. As a final note for today, Elon Musk tweeted this about revelations from the trial: “All true. Bet most people still don’t know that a Clinton campaign lawyer, using campaign funds, created an elaborate hoax about Trump and Russia. Makes you wonder what else is fake.”

7. The Democrats' fraudulent claims

President Biden has a tendency to tell the same dubious stories over and over, but that’s not just a typical grandpa thing. He keeps repeating political attack narratives that have long been debunked (no, Trump never said there were “very good people” among white supremacist Nazis.) So I assume he’ll keep on claiming that voter integrity laws are “Jim Crow 2.0,” despite the fact that the early vote totals in Georgia's primaries just blasted that away like someone going crow-hunting with an AK-47.

Remember the Democrats’ hysteria over Georgia passing a law to ensure elections were trustworthy? It was racist voter suppression (based on the racist assumption that black people can’t obtain an ID or sign their names.) Proponents said the laws simply made it harder to cheat, but easier to vote.

Nevertheless, Stacey Abrams railed and Biden ranted that it was “an atrocity” and “Jim Crow on steroids.” Major League Baseball cost Atlanta $100 million by moving the All-Star Game to Colorado, which has stricter voting laws than the ones in Georgia. Back in the (hopefully dying) days of woke corporate activism, the CEOs of Coca-Cola, Apple, Facebook, Merck, American Express, Google, Citigroup, UPS Porsch, Microsoft, Bank of America, Viacom CBS, Alfack JP Morgan Chase, BlackRock and more joined in the condemnation of Georgia for trying to prevent voter fraud.

Now we discover that, ironically, their claims were fraudulent. In a subscriber-only article, Spencer Brown of Townhall.com reports that as of a few days ago, Georgians had cast 422,565 in-person early voting ballots. That’s 150% higher than at the same point in 2020, and 200% more than in 2018.

https://townhall.com/columnists/spencerbrown/2022/05/19/georgia-sets-early-voting-record-and-debunks-jim-crow-2-0-fear-mongering-n2607511

Brad Slager has more…

https://townhall.com/columnists/bradslager/2022/05/19/the-big-losers-in-the-georgia-primary-everyone-promising-voter-suppression-n2607523

Similar hyperbolic claims of “voter suppression” were rained down on Texas’ new voter integrity laws. Their primary turnout also increased substantially.

So it appears that Republicans are as incompetent at “voter suppression” as Democrats are at…well, everything else. And all that whoop-de-doo over “Jim Crow on steroids” was actually just “typical Democrat bull spouting on steroids.”

By the way, I don’t think Democrats will be happy to find that the laws actually make it easier to vote and that more people are doing so because the primary results also show that a lot more people are voting Republican. And I mean a LOT more. Out of the first 10 states, Democrat turnout is up 3% from 2018, and Republican turnout is up…wait, let me clean my reading glasses…yes, that’s correct: up 38%!

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/athena-thorne/2022/05/19/yet-another-omen-of-impending-democrat-doom-in-the-2022-midterms-n1599208

Mike Huckabee

Let me tell you something I know well:

There is more news than ever before covering topics like: Inflation, Energy prices, Ukraine, the Supreme Court Roe v Wade leak, illegal immigration, the Hunter Biden scandal(s), John Durham's investigation…you name it!

Now is the time to stop watching tv, reading fifteen different email newsletters and let me do that for you. I will watch, read and write about these stories and you can read the news, from my point of view, in my Substack newsletter on a daily basis.

The Substack newsletter combines my morning and evening editions into one morning email AND best of all the email is ADVERTISEMENT FREE.

Interested?

Get 7 day free trial

The free trial will provide you 7 days of a paid subscription to The Morning Edition, free of charge. After 7 days, you will automatically be charged on an annual basis. You can cancel anytime.

Because you are someone who takes an interest in the news and my thoughts on politics, I knew I needed to email you today. I hope you will try the free trial.