Mike Huckabee

Here’s the kind of story that somehow tends to get released on late Fridays of holiday weekends when nobody will notice it: an internal State Department document proves that, just as many of us suspected and said so at the time, John Kerry and other former Obama officials were secretly meeting in 2018 with Iranian officials, continuing to conduct their own US foreign policy.

https://www.westernjournal.com/bidens-slip-tongue-denigrates-entire-political-system-democracy-not-perfect-never-good/

Some of the topics they discussed included “nuclear weapons, potential prisoner swaps, [the] Afghanistan withdrawal and negotiations with the Taliban.” While President Trump was deciding on sanctions and trying to extricate us from their bad Iranian nuclear deal, they were acting as if they were still in office, trying to preserve it by conducting their own US foreign policy and signaling that Iran should stand firm against America and the policies of the actual elected President.

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the former Obama officials “working against their own nation’s policies alongside such a brutal regime” was “bad stuff, dangerous stuff, un-American stuff,” and that they “should be ashamed of themselves.”

Actually, it's far worse. They were illegally conducting US foreign policy with a hostile nation in an attempt to undermine the official foreign policy of the elected President. To accurately use terms that Democrats love to throw at their political opponents, it was sedition and insurrection, possibly treason, and at the very least, a clear violation of the Logan Act that they’re always trying to pin on other people.

Between current National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan’s alleged role in launching the groundless Russian Collusion investigation and “climate czar” Kerry’s illegal attempts to conduct secret negotiations with Iran, exactly how many treasonous individuals are currently on the Biden Administration payroll?

Over the weekend, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband Paul Pelosi was charged with DUI in Napa, California, after he reportedly crashed his Porsche into a Jeep while driving home from a party. Nobody was injured, and his attorney denied a report that it was a second offense, claiming the earlier DUI was someone else with the same name.

A spokesman for Nancy Pelosi said, "The Speaker will not be commenting on this private matter which occurred while she was on the East Coast."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/house-speaker-nancy-pelosis-husband-paul-arrested-in-california-charged-with-dui/ar-AAXRuYv

Nice job of distancing herself from her husband by a continent. I have a feeling their house will be as frosty as her two luxury refrigerators when she returns home.

I could do an essay about how Nancy holds her political opponents to the strictest standards and wants to send them to jail for any offense, real or imagined. But since there could be personal issues at play here with her husband, I’m not going to pile on, at least not yet. However, I will turn the floor over to one of my writers, Pat Reeder, for a rebuttal of her brief statement:

“The reason I never knew my grandfather, and why my late father was never able to attend college, is that a drunk driver killed my grandfather when my dad was in high school. He had to immediately go into the Army, then to work to support his mother and younger brother. Because of that drunk driver, I was the first person in our family to be able to attend college. So please don’t tell me that DUI is a ‘private matter.’ It’s a matter of public safety that can have massive repercussions for innocent people. A car with a drunk at the wheel is just as deadly a weapon as a gun. I’d like to see you pretend to be just as concerned about the former as the latter.:”

Mike Huckabee

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

Triple A reports that as of Tuesday, the average price of a gallon of regular gas was $4.598. As noted by Western Journal, that’s an increase of 35.5% since November 23, 2021, which is when President Biden announced “a major effort to moderate the price of oil, an effort that will span the globe in its reach, and ultimately reach your corner gas station, God willing.”

https://www.westernjournal.com/new-numbers-show-high-gas-prices-skyrocketed-since-biden-began-major-effort-lower/

The global effort doesn’t seem to be going so well. Saudi Arabia just announced that it won’t make any further efforts to increase oil production. They say there’s plenty of crude oil but the problem is refining capacity, so they won’t pump any more than they are now.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/commodities/oil-price-outlook-saudi-arabia-commodities-surging-world-economic-forum-2022-5

November 2021 was also just over three months before Putin invaded Ukraine and gas prices were already high enough to justify a global effort to moderate them, so these aren't "Putin price hikes." What it would really take is a domestic effort: stop waging war on our own oil and gas industries.

Speaking of that, I hate to bring you more bad news, but this story reports that one of the few bright spots for US energy prices is that we pay about one-fourth as much for natural gas as Asia and Europe does. But an industry expert said that over the next six months, our prices are expected to surge and line up with other nations’ prices. That’s more of the “equity” of high fuel prices that Democrats have long argued for as an incentive to force Americans into small electric cars.

So when you hear Biden talking about bringing down gas prices and they only keep going up, remember that someone who really wants to bring down prices doesn’t do everything in his power to make them more expensive.

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

Mike Huckabee

If Special Counsel John Durham hadn’t obtained the Perkins Coie billing records showing attorney Michael Sussmnn billed Hillary’s campaign for his FBI visit, he might not have had a case. Those billing records prove Sussmann was indeed working for a client when he pointedly told the FBI he wasn’t.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/25/michael-sussmann-billed-clinton-camp-on-day-he-talked-with-fbi/

In the entry for September 19, 2016, the date of Sussmann’s meeting with FBI general counsel James Baker, Hillary For America is listed as the client. The time allotted is 3.3 hours, and the description is “work and communication regarding confidential project.” He’d originally logged it as 4.5 hours but scaled it back.

I wonder how much this top DC attorney was billing by the hour for such a shady bit of business. We know Perkins Coie pocketed nearly $12 million from the DNC, Hillary For America, and (yes) from Obama’s group Organizing For Action to hire Fusion GPS to create faux-Russian dirt. With so many middle men to hide the source of the “dossier,” all of them taking their cut, ex-spy Christopher Steele was paid a measly $168,000 for his determined gossip-gathering and fiction-writing. Here’s that story from AMERICAN THINKER; notice it goes all the way back to November 2017. You and I have known the real story behind the fake “dossier” for SO LONG.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/11/so_the_steele_dossier_was_bought_cheap_what_did_the_other_12_million_pay_for.html

By the way, guess who else was paying Fusion GPS for fake evidence against Trump? The hilariously-named Democracy Integrity Project, funded by...(drum roll, please)...George Soros. I am not kidding –- here’s the story from last year. This group is run by Daniel Jones, former intelligence staffer for California Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein. He’s the one who contracted with Fusion GPS and Steele.

https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/30/soros-funded-disinformation-group-paid-nearly-1-million-more-to-creators-of-steele-dossier-disinformation-operation/

Bonchie at RedState says the billing statement obtained by Durham proves Sussmann lied when he said –- and texted –- that he was a concerned citizen rather than a paid advocate, but he goes further to say “it shows that Clinton herself, as leader of her campaign, didn’t just approve the false story going to the media, but also to the FBI.”

As we discussed yesterday, there’s a huge difference, legally, between taking phony evidence to the media and taking it to the FBI, and witnesses have been careful to link her only with the media campaign. Presenting fake evidence to the FBI to frame someone is a crime. And we just didn’t buy the idea that Sussmann would’ve gone to the FBI behind Hillary’s back and then billed her for the meeting! In other words, Hillary had to know.

The candidate is ultimately in charge of his or her own campaign. (“I’m so-and-so, and I approved this message.”)  Robby Mook, as campaign manager, answered to Hillary. Sussmann, as attorney for the campaign, answered to Hillary. And we know, if anyone insists on running everything she can get her hands on, it’s Hillary Clinton. The jury might be too biased to even care, but you and I know she approved Sussmann’s FBI visit.

Bonchie concurs, and says, “...the fact that the Hillary campaign hatched a false conspiracy theory and fed it to the FBI for political gain is overwhelming.”

https://redstate.com/bonchie/2022/05/25/durham-brings-the-literal-receipts-connecting-the-alfa-bank-conspiracy-to-hillary-clinton-n569767

He sees Sussmann as “the first shoe that must drop” on the path towards Hillary. This step is “another direct link to Hillary herself,” he says. Of course, with a jury stacked in Sussmann’s favor, conviction is far from assured, no matter how strong the evidence. But what Durham is really doing is putting a story together, and all the major thoroughfares and interesting side routes lead back to Hillary.

Yesterday, we reported on FBI official Curtis Heide’s testimony that the ‘Justice’ Department was listed in the opening document as the origin of the Alfa Bank “evidence,” not just an “anonymous third party” (Sussmann), and that this was due to a “paperwork error.” Legal analyst Andrew McCarthy told the WASHINGTON EXAMINER, “This investigation opening document is totally outrageous. It not only claims that the information came from the Justice Department. It suggests that the Justice Department commissioned and may even vouch for the ‘white paper,’ when they hadn’t.

Nick Arama at RedState does not believe it was a “paperwork error.” He says, “So, the excuse is that he [Heide] doesn’t even know the basic structure or breakdown of the FBI and the DOJ? What do these guys take us for, fools?” Arama suggests we “grab the popcorn,” as there is more to come.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/05/24/fbi-agent-at-sussmann-trial-just-dropped-a-bomb-about-an-ongoing-investigation-n569303

As for Wednesday, after addressing the billing records and whether they indeed reflect that meeting, the prosecution rested its case, and it was time for the defense to call witnesses. The defense wants to show that the FBI was well aware Sussmann was representing Hillary For America. The FOX News story linked to below has details on the witnesses they called to create doubt in the jurors’ minds.

Example: A project assistant at the firm representing Sussmann --- Democrat legal powerhouse Latham and Watkins --- was called to the stand and asked to comment on a chart that showed various internal FBI documents that referred to Sussmann as working for the Hillary campaign, the DNC and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). Of course, they could be well aware of his Democrat connections and still be lied to by Sussmann about the purpose of that particular visit. But that’s about all the defense can do.

The claims the defense is making now are in direct conflict with what James Baker testified last week. Baker said he remembered with 100 percent certainty that Sussmann told him he was not there on behalf of any client. And, of course, Sussmann had already texted him the same thing. Why would Sussmann say that if he knew the FBI already believed he was working for Hillary?

We still don’t know if Sussmann will take the stand in his own defense. FOX News has reported that it depends on whether the judge will bar prosecutors from questioning him about pre-indictment negotiations between his counsel and Special Counsel John Durham’s office. They don’t want prosecutors asking him about materials that were submitted to the government before charges against him were filed. These probably would have been materials submitted to try to persuade Durham not to indict Sussmann. Apparently, these did not work, and now our curiosity is peaked.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sussmann-may-testify-trial-pending-judge-durham-trump-russia

If Sussmann chooses to testify, that will likely be Thursday, with closing arguments to begin Tuesday, after Memorial Day. If he decides not to testify, closing arguments would likely begin Thursday, and the trial might even be over this week. I have the sneaking suspicion that this judge will rule whichever way leads to the choice Sussmann prefers to make.

In the meantime, law professor Jonathan Turley has an excellent question for us to ponder: Given that researchers were practically ridiculing the bogus data that Sussmann gave to the FBI, why were James Comey and the rest of the 7^th Floor so “fired up” (agent Joe Pienkta’s testimony) that they demanded a FULL INVESTIGATION! I think we know.

https://jonathanturley.org/2022/05/25/fbi-agent-comey-and-other-leadership-were-fired-up-to-pursue-the-false-alfa-bank-claims/#more-189132

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

Monday marked the beginning of Week 2 (Day 6) of the Michael Sussmann trial. As you know, last week ended dramatically, when Robby Mook, Clinton’s own campaign manager, said she’d personally signed off on releasing the (phony) Alfa Bank story to the media, even though her campaign people told her it hadn’t been verified. Two CIA staffers also testified Friday, saying that Sussmann had lied to them, too, about not representing any client.

Also on Friday, a now-retired CIA station chief described meeting Sussmann earlier and being told a variation of the lie; namely, that he did have a client, but it was a Republican. The idea of Perkins Coie representing Republicans is almost as crazy as Trump colluding with Russians.

One thing seemed odd to us on Friday, but we found the explanation later. The prosecution was still presenting its case, but Mook was called as a defense witness. Turns out, Mook had planned to vacation in Spain, and the court ruled he could testify out of order so he could go. (Nice! One hopes prosecution witnesses would have received similar dispensation from this judge.) As it happens, Mook was helpful to Durham, so much so that the defense probably wishes they’d just let him go to Spain.

Anyway, Monday might not have been quite as eventful as last Friday, but there were interesting developments, with Bill Priestap –- Peter Strzok’s supervisor –- called to the stand. Trump attorney Alina Habba and her team were there today, as they have been every day, and in an appearance on HANNITY said Priestap seemed unable to recall much of anything, even with his own notes in front of him. He seems to have taken a cue from Hillary herself, who is known for coming up with almost countless versions of “I don’t recall.”

Two other FBI officials, Ryan Gaynor and Allison Sands, testified. Sands said she’d received a memo the day Sussmann met with Baker about a referral on the case from the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (!!!) It didn’t mention Sussmann as the source. This document was circulated to Peter Strzok as well.

Gaynor testified that top FBI leadership had decided to keep Sussmann’s identity on “close hold.” The Chicago field office wanted access to the source but couldn’t get it. He told the court that had he known the source had a political interest or one that overlapped with the Bureau’s, he might not have ever volunteered to be point person at headquarters.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/23/fbi-told-agents-trump-russia-data-source-was-from-doj-not-clinton-tied-lawyer/

So, when did the ‘Justice’ Department decide to jump in? The DOJ was even mentioned as the source for the “white papers,” when we know that none of them came from there and at least one came from Fusion GPS, creator of the likewise phony “dossier.”

Gregg Jarrett said on Monday’s HANNITY “that the FBI, James Comey and his minions, were lying to their own field agents, and [Gaynor] said, ‘Had we known the truth, had they been honest with us, it would have changed the equation dramatically. We would’ve recognized the hoax for what it was, a political smear invented by Hillary Clinton, and funded and disseminated by her personally, by the way, as well as her many confederates.’”

Jarrett also noted what we’ve said about the timeline: that by the time Trump had been sworn in as President, the FBI had already debunked both the “dossier” and the Alfa Bank story. Yet Sussmann kept on pushing it, and within the FBI, Comey, Strzok and McCabe went right on investigating Trump, treating the hoax as seriously as ever. They used it, Jarrett said, as a “pretext, to escalate their investigation of Donald Trump, to drive him from office.” Comey even stole government documents when Trump fired him, to trigger the appointment of a special counsel, “who just happened to be his longtime friend and colleague, Bob Mueller.”

Either Mueller and his huge team of lawyers and investigators didn’t know this was a hoax that traced back to Hillary, he said, or “they knew it, and they covered it up.”

So, assuming Mueller didn’t know, how could it be that he didn’t find out? We’ve known Trump-Russia “collusion” was a fabrication since early 2017, when then-House Intel Committee chair Devin Nunes and his lead investigator Kash Patel connected the dots to Hillary’s campaign. Jonathan Turley calls Hillary’s involvement “Washington’s worst-kept but least -acknowledged secret.” A must-read:

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/3496659-how-the-sussmann-trial-revealed-hillary-clintons-role-in-the-alfa-bank-scandal/

Turley reminds us that then-CIA Director John Brennan actually told President Obama that Hillary planned to tar Trump as a Russia “colluder” to distract from her own use of a private email server for classified State Department business. Brennan told Obama this three days BEFORE “Crossfire Hurricane” was opened by the FBI. Turley’s report sums it all up nicely and will make you wish everyone involved in this scheme could be confined to, if not jail, then a very, very hot place for all eternity.

That’s especially true after reading that Hillary tweeted, “it’s now clear that so-called ‘fake news’ can have real-world consequences.” It’s time for the Queen Of Fake News to experience some real-world consequences firsthand.

Of course, it’s not just Hillary. As Sundance at The Conservative Treehouse put it, “The DC politicians, institutions of the DOJ and FBI, and the entire corporate media world have been pretending not to know the truth for almost six years. Now they are in a pretending pickle.”

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/05/22/apparently-while-investigating-trump-russia-robert-mueller-and-andrew-weissmann-never-interviewed-clinton-campaign-manager-robby-mook/

He asks the question everyone should be asking now: “How did Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann spend 2 years investigating Trump-Russia; with a team of 19 lawyers, $40 million in resources; 40 FBI agents; 2,800 subpoenas; 500 search warrants and 500 witnesses; and not find out that Hillary Clinton created the hoax they were investigating?”

As Turley points out, Mueller’s team originally consisted of the very FBI officials who were given Sussmann’s Alfa Bank “evidence.” But, believe it or not, they apparently never talked to any Clinton campaign people, or Fusion GPS, or Rodney Joffe, or Marc Elias, or...Michael Sussmann.

Finally, we’re gong to make fun of Hillary now, because she deserves it. Victoria Taft has some video of Hillary from a 2019 interview with NBC’s Jane Pauley. Seeing it now gives new meaning to what Hillary said so disingenuously at the time: “I don’t know we’ll ever know everything that happened," she told Pauley, "but clearly we know a lot and are learning more every day...I know that [Trump] knows this wasn’t on the level.”

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2022/05/23/flashback-watch-hillary-trash-trump-for-election-funny-stuff-when-she-was-doing-it-n1600140

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

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

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

Wednesday, May 18, marked Day 3 of the Sussmann trial. Before we take a look at what happened that day, here’s a brief editorial from the NEW YORK POST shaming the media for not covering the trial. It didn’t take their editorial board many words to do that.

As they point out, THE NEW YORK TIMES and the WASHINGTON POST even split a Pulitzer for advancing “the most successful disinformation campaign in living memory.” I would add that in a profession that valued honesty, both “news” outlets would be made to give it back.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/18/why-the-media-is-ignoring-trial-at-center-of-russiagate/

“If it had been Republicans doing it to a Democrat, the press would be losing its mind,” the POST says. Of course, that’s true.

It’s likely a DC jury would be looking at it differently as well.

Wednesday was a big day for testimony, with former FBI General Counsel James Baker taking the stand. Baker’s the central witness in the case, as he’s the one Sussmann allegedly lied to during a September 2016 meeting at the FBI --- and definitely lied to in a text Sussmann sent to try to get the meeting in the first place.

Baker testified that he’d become friends with Sussmann and they’d been in “frequent contact.” Also (this is new), he said he was “surprised” to get Sussmann’s text on his personal cellphone requesting a “short meeting” at the FBI. This is the text in which Sussmann lied by saying, “I’m coming on my own –- not on behalf of a client or company –- want to help the Bureau.”

Sussmann was granted the meeting, during which he presented bogus evidence of a server connection between Trump Tower and Russia-linked Alfa Bank. (One of the agents who examined this evidence has testified that it was debunked that very day.)

Baker will return to the stand Thursday morning. The other big witness for the day was Hillary For America General Counsel Marc Elias, who was partners with Sussmann at law firm Perkins Coie. (As you know, Elias has also been lead attorney for an army of litigators who bombarded the battleground states and got them to remove election safeguards, sometimes without the required legislative approval. Wish we could ask him about THAT under oath.) Elias testified that he personally hired oppo research firm Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump. Fusion GPS called on British ex-spy Christopher Steele, who responded by compiling the bogus “dossier,” consisting of unverified rumor.

Elias said he kept the hiring quiet wisthin the campaign. “Given who I represent,” he told jurors, “I tend to not want more people to know about it than have to know about it.” We’re not sure exactly what he meant by that cryptic comment, but it sounds shady, like the CIA’s “need-to-know basis.”

When asked if he was aware Sussmann was planning to go to the FBI, he said he was not, and that he wouldn’t have approved that if he’d known of it. But law professor Jonathan Turley saw an inconsistency, tweeting: “Marc Elias testified that he would not have approved going to the FBI with the false Russian Alfa Bank claim because he did not trust the FBI or Director Comey. Yet, the campaign associates also aggressively pushed the Steele dossier to the FBI.”

Wednesday night, Sean Hannity did a segment on the makeup of the jury for the Sussmann trial, and

the news was stunning. He passed along reporting from the NEW YORK POST that Judge Christopher Cooper allowed donors to Hillary’s campaign and also to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez into the jury pool. Durham objected to the seating of one of them, a man who works in public policy for Amazon and could only say he would “strive for impartiality as best I can.” Judge Cooper overruled Durham.

Another juror in the pool had written on her questionnaire that she worked for the Sierra Club, thought the criminal justice system was racist and believed “the police should be defunded.”

In Washington DC in 2016, voters favored Hillary over Trump by a staggering 90.0 percent to 4.1 percent. And as we’ve previously reported, Judge Cooper himself is tight with the Democrat Party; his wife, Amy Jeffress, has even represented one of the prime perpetrators of the Russia hoax, then-FBI assistant counsel Lisa Page. The two were married by...Merrick Garland. It’s unbelievable that Judge Cooper didn’t recuse himself and let the case pass to another judge.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/16/hillary-aoc-donors-among-jury-pool-in-ex-clinton-lawyers-trial/

Former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said on Hannity’s show that for a trial like this, there shouldn’t be donors to ANY political party. The reports he had heard were “very troubling.”

Devin Nunes, who chaired the House Intel Committee, said that in this trial, Durham is looking at one sliver of the overall conspiracy. He noted the incestuous nature of this Washington DC group and the connections of this judge. And he offered what might be the Quote Of The Day about the trial: “If this case was not brought in DC...there’s no way that Sussmann would not have pled guilty.” In DC, he knows his chances are excellent to get one or two jurors to “hold this up, to let him off scot free.”

Still, for the first time, Nunes said, Durham is able to bring direct evidence, not just circumstantial. “We now know journalists...were meeting directly with the Democrats, taking this horrible story and willing to go and put it out there, just to destroy Republicans and destroy President Trump before the election.”

Nunes also noted that the next trial, of “dossier” collaborator Igor Danchenko, is in Virginia.

Margot Cleveland, in her piece written Wednesday, details how the story told by Sussmann’s defense just doesn’t hold up. In effect, she expanded on what Turley said in his tweet, above. It’s hard to buy the story that the Hillary campaign didn’t WANT Sussmann to share the Alfa Bank story with the FBI. “...The information known to date,” Cleveland says, “plus the modus operandi of the Spygate players through the years they peddled the Russia-collusion hoax, renders this argument laughable.”

Just read what defense attorney Michael Bosworth told the jury and see how inconsistent it is.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/18/spygate-conspirators-start-selling-their-hoax-to-a-washington-dc-jury-but-the-facts-dont-fit/

The evidence, largely in the form of texts between Clinton’s people and Fusion GPS, contradicts his story. It suggests that Fusion GPS absolutely knew the value of having the FBI investigate the Alfa Bank story; they used that investigation to help “sell” the story to outlets such as Reuters.

Cleveland really picks apart the defense’s story that the Clinton campaign didn’t want Sussmann to go to the FBI. One danger we see is that a jury –- especially a biased one –- might not be willing or even able to follow this if it’s too long or complicated. It seems to me that Hillary’s own tweets promoting the Alfa Bank story disprove the defense’s fairy tale that she wouldn’t have wanted the FBI brought in. That would make the story bigger! Hillary would LOVE it.

Oh, wait, I forgot –- the judge refused to allow her tweets into evidence.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10761335/Judge-refuses-allow-Clinton-tweets-claiming-Trump-colluded-Russia-admitted-court.html

Mike Huckabee

Day 1 of the Michael Sussmann trial was devoted to jury selection, and in Washington, DC, the concern is that it’s virtually impossible to assemble a jury that’s not biased against Trump. Reportedly, there were members of the jury pool who were dismissed because they said they had such negative feelings towards Trump that they’d be unable to be objective. If that’s the case, their honesty is to be applauded.

But we also heard news reports that at least a couple of people who admitted to being very anti-Trump were selected as jurors anyway. The difference must be that they said under oath that they believe they can be objective. Hope they’re right about themselves.

On Monday, speaking with Jesse Watters on FOX News, Mollie Hemingway put this concern about the jury in perspective, saying that the purpose of having a special counsel investigation was to uncover the story of the Russia Hoax, and regardless of whether or not Sussmann is convicted on this one count of lying, that has been accomplished. She’s right; through John Durham’s court filings, we know there really was a “joint venture” involving Hillary For America, the DNC, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele, the Brookings Institution, the FBI, Rodney Joffe, his team at Georgia Tech, and others. They all shared a “common interest,” which was to defeat Trump and elect Hillary.

In previewing the evidence that he was trying to get admitted in court, Durham essentially drew a map with all roads leading back to Hillary. And we know that the whole blasted story they pushed –- saying Donald Trump was an agent of Vladimir Putin –- was a monstrous lie, a fraud perpetrated on millions of people, millions of VOTERS. Some actually still believe it, as ridiculous as it is to anyone who is not an idiot.

The charge against Sussmann, though certainly warranted and supported by the evidence, represents something much larger, as it has also offered Durham a vehicle to get more of the story out. Yes, this Obama-appointed judge, D.C. District Judge Christopher Cooper, has ruled to keep the “joint venture” communications away from the jury with dubious rulings on “attorney-client privilege,” but he can’t keep them away from the American public. And he can’t keep them out of Durham’s final report.

Margot Cleveland has a new piece about the trial; it ran Monday as jury selection was getting underway.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/16/this-weeks-spygate-trial-is-bad-news-for-hillary-clinton/

The attorney-client privilege argument cuts both ways. As Cleveland points out, when then-Fusion GPS employee Laura Seago refuses to answer on the stand because of Judge Cooper’s ruling that the testimony is “privileged,” (when she’s a “techie” who isn’t actually part of the legal conversation by any stretch), it will just drive home that Sussmann really WAS the attorney for Hillary’s henchmen, and that he was paid to do her dirty work.

On Tuesday, Durham intends to call Georgia Tech researcher Dave Dagon, who was given immunity from prosecution last summer. From Cleveland’s description of his role in the scheme, it appears his testimony is expected to create a timeline and to tie the players together in creating and pushing the Alfa Bank and Yotaphone hoaxes.

Cleveland didn’t mention it, but also on the witness stand, as early as Tuesday, will be none other than Marc Elias, general counsel for the 2016 Clinton campaign and the man most responsible for making election fraud in America easy and profitable (though that is a separate issue). It’s really too bad we don’t have cameras in federal court, especially when you think of the testimony we CAN watch, and I refer specifically to the Depp v. Heard civil trial. I’d gladly take a pass on that (which I already have) to watch Durham at work.

Anyway, first on the stand Tuesday will be FBI agent David Martin, who will be “an expert witness on computer matters,” according to the New York Post.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/16/former-partner-fbi-agent-to-testify-against-ex-clinton-campaign-lawyer-sussmann/

He’ll also testify about the significance of Sussmann’s lie relative to how it might have affected the FBI’s decision-making. The defense, understandably, has tried to bar that testimony, on grounds that seemed from reading the NYP story to be amusingly vague.

But the most encouraging news comes from Cleveland. Which is to say, as the trial goes on –- it will likely last about two weeks –- she expects a lot more to come out in court in the prosecution of Sussmann that will connect Hillary Clinton herself to Spygate. “The real loser...will be Hillary Clinton,” she says.

Mike Huckabee

On Day 2 of the Michael Sussmann trial, federal prosecutors under the direction of special counsel John Durham gave an opening statement accusing Sussmann of using the FBI as a “political tool” to create an October surprise against 2016 presidential candidate Donald Trump.

As Trace Gallagher on FOX News reported, they said it was “a plan that used and manipulated the FBI. A plan that the defendant hoped would trigger news outlets and trigger an FBI investigation. A plan that largely succeeded.”

It succeeded because, even though the claim was false, Trump and Russia were “forever linked in the court of public opinion.”

Assistant Special Counsel Deborah Brittain Shaw told the jurors, “He told a lie that was designed to achieve a political end, a lie that was designed to inject the FBI into a presidential election.”

Perhaps deliberately using a term that resonates with the left, she said, “This is a case about privilege...the privilege of a lawyer who thought that for the powerful, the normal rules didn’t apply, that he could use the FBI as a political tool...The defendant lied to direct the power and resources of the FBI to his own ends and to serve the agendas of his clients.”

Given that this DC jury is likely biased against Trump, Shaw addressed what she called “the proverbial elephant in the room,” the political context that threatens to influence jurors: “Some people have very strong feelings about politics and Russia,” she told them, “and many people have strong feelings about Donald Trump and Russia. But we are not here because these allegations involved either of them, nor are we here because the client was the Hillary Clinton campaign.”

“We are here,” she said, “because the FBI is our institution that shouldn’t be used as a political tool for anyone --- not Republicans, not Democrats, not anyone.” She urged them to keep their own political views out of the decisions they make in the courtroom. I’ve rarely known a leftist who could keep politics out of ANY decision, but maybe Durham found some.

“Whether we are Democrats or Republicans, whether we hate Donald Trump or love him, we have to believe the government is above politics,” the prosecution said, and that “the government should never be used as a political pawn.”

I would add, “...even though some in government –- Strzok, McCabe, etc. –- were happy to oblige.”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sussmann-durham-trial-prosecution-clinton-lawyer-fbi-october-surprise-trump

Legal analyst Andrew C. McCarthy told Brian Kilmeade on FOX News that in Washington DC, “the most political town in the country,” Durham’s biggest challenge will indeed be this jury. “This is not a home game for him in Washington,” McCarthy said. But Durham had no choice but to bring the case in Washington because that’s where the alleged offense took place.

McCarthy was impressed that they seated a jury in one day, but he does take that as a sign that this judge wants to move things along, not let Durham take time with a lot of “joint venture” testimony. So I suspect we might have to wait for the special counsel’s final report to see all the dots officially connected.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/durhams-biggest-problem-in-sussmann-trial-is-the-jury-andy-mccarthy/ar-AAXo7zs

Moving to the defense, attorney Michael Bosworth argued that Sussmann is “a good man, a family man” who never tried to hide anything from the FBI, and that they knew he represented the Clinton campaign. (It appears, though, that they did NOT know he came to them specifically with the Alfa Bank story because Clinton was paying him to do it. He told them the opposite.)

Bosworth said it was known that Sussmann represented the DNC after their servers had been hacked by Russians. (Not that hacking by Russians has ever been proved.)

Bosworth called the charge “nonsensical” and said the lie would be “impossible to prove,” since neither man took notes at the meeting (NOTE: isn’t that, in itself, curious?) and Baker can’t possibly have a strong recollection of what was said after five-and-a-half years. He told the jury that Baker’s memory was “clear as mud.” Never mind that the jury will also see the same lie turn up in Sussmann’s text message to him.

Bosworth also asserted that Sussmann’s action didn’t benefit the Clinton camp in any way.

Now wait just a minute. Hillary still managed to lose the election, but considering that the bogus Trump-Russia story dominated the headlines literally for years; gave Hillary a bogus excuse for losing (one of many); cast a dark shadow on Trump’s presidency; and wasted his administration’s time, attention and money with the Mueller investigation, I’d say it was still a gift to her.

Bosworth insisted that Sussmann was motivated by national security, not politics. He said, “If [Sussmann] wasn’t motivated by an actual interest in national security, why did he go to the CIA, months after the election? He had a genuine interest in national security and doing the right thing.” But this reasoning makes no sense. If someone didn’t like the outcome of an election and wanted to get a President impeached, and he had an “in” with the CIA, he certainly might take them an allegation like this and try to get some action.

Of course, you’re familiar with “the” text that Sussmann sent to FBI general counsel James Baker, who was a friend of his, to get the meeting: “Jim – it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss. Do you have availability for a short meeting tomorrow? I’m coming on my own – not on behalf of a client or company –- want to help the Bureau. Thanks.”

If Durham hadn’t obtained that revealing text, and also the Perkins Coie billing records that show Sussmann billed the Clinton campaign for that meeting, this would just be a matter of whom to believe. But Durham has the proof he was lying, RIGHT THERE.

He didn’t get to the Marc Elias testimony today, as some observers had thought he might, so we’re still waiting for that, and also for James Baker to take the stand.

But in the meantime, Durham called FBI Supervisory Special Agent Scott Hellman, who testified that it took him and another agent “less than a day to ascertain that data and ‘white papers’ on two thumb drives Sussmann gave Baker did not support the Trump-Alfa Bank ‘secret connection’ allegation.” After examining the materials for evidence of hacking, he did a technical review, he said, and cross-referenced them. He said it became clear that “whoever had written that paper had just come to some conclusions not supported by the technical data.”

Also, “the methodology was questionable,” he said, and it didn’t make sense that a candidate for President would put his own name on a “supposedly secret domain name.”

https://dailycaller.com/2022/05/17/fbi-less-than-day-sussmann-trial-alfa-bank-bogus-russia/

So –- at long last –- all major news networks led their evening broadcasts with the blockbuster story that the FBI had debunked in ONE DAY the evidence for what turned out to be a coordinated attempt to frame Donald Trump before the 2016 election.

Just kidding; I made that up. ABC, NBC and CBS all ignored the story completely. They did cover the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard trial, however.

https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kevin-tober/2022/05/17/nets-ignore-news-fbi-knew-trump-russia-collusion-was-hoax-all-along

Mike Huckabee

In other Russia Hoax-related litigation, former Trump National Security Advisor (for two whole weeks!) Michael Flynn has filed a $50 million claim against the FBI and the “Justice” Department under the Federal Tort Claims Act, for malicious prosecution in their so-called investigation of the Russia Hoax.

Investigative reporter John Solomon has obtained a copy of the filing, known as a Form 95 Civil Claim. Filed quietly on February 22, it claims that Flynn can prove political interference inside the FBI.

https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/michael-flynn-files-50-million-claim-against-feds

The career of this three-star Army general was arguably ruined. Thus, the $50 million represents “compensatory damages including but not limited to lost past and future earnings/revenue, emotional distress, lost opportunity to be President’s National Security Advisor, significant restraints of personal liberty, attorney’s fees/expenses and court costs in defending against malicious prosecution, abuse of process, false arrest.”

One strong piece of evidence of his political prosecution is that now-infamous meeting in the Oval Office attended by then-President Obama, Vice President Biden, and FBI officials. Flynn’s filing mentions that this meeting was held just weeks after Obama pointedly urged Trump not to choose Flynn as national security adviser. Flynn also alleges that former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe had a personal vendetta against him.

“Flynn was the target of a politically motivated investigation and prosecution that had no merit when it began, no merit during its course, and no merit in the end when the charges were withdrawn by the DOJ and ultimately dismissed by the Court after Flynn received a full pardon,” the filing reads. They called him a traitor, it says, acting in concert with a foreign power.

They even threatened to prosecute his son unless he pleaded guilty. (Recall that he did, then withdrew the plea after getting new legal representation.) The filing says, “The federal government’s targeting of a citizen for baseless criminal prosecution and eliciting a plea bargain through threatening of family members is outrageous conduct of the highest order.”

We wish Michael Flynn all the best in his pursuit of this suit. No punishment that could be levied is too great. The government cannot be allowed to get away with this banana-republic-style political intimidation and ruination.

Mike Huckabee

Pat Reeder, Staff writer

There’s been so much news the past week that it's almost overwhelming, but I can’t let the passing of country star Mickey Gilley go unmentioned. Gilley died last weekend in Pasadena, Texas, at 86 of undisclosed causes.

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/mickey-gilley-dead

Gilley was best known for his ‘80s hits that were associated with the “Urban Cowboy” craze kicked off by the John Travolta movie (the country flipside of the disco boom Travolta sparked with “Saturday Night Fever.”) Gilley not enjoyed huge chart success with such pop-country hits as “Stand By Me” and “Don’t the Girls All Get Prettier at Closing Time,” he also became famous for his Gilley’s club, the “world’s biggest honky-tonk,” with its mechanical bull, as seen in the film. Even after the hits dried up, his name was still associated with the Mickey Gilley Golf Classic and live venues. He had a theater in Branson, and there was a Gilley’s to the west of us in Fort Worth (now Billy Bob’s Texas) and still a Gilley’s to the east in Dallas (not his, but named after him.)

Those who know only his '80s “Urban Cowboy” years might be surprised to learn that he’d been plugging away for quite a while before that. His first record, “Ooh We Baby,” came in 1957 (the label was "Minor Records"); his first charted song was “Is It Wrong” in 1960 (the uncredited bass player was Kenny Rogers); and his first album was "Lonely Wine" in 1964. He overcame a number of setbacks, including two fires that destroyed his venues and an accident that paralyzed him for three months and ended his ability to play piano. But he kept performing as a singer and storyteller.

Mickey Gilley was a member of a famous trio of singer/pianist cousins from Ferriday, Louisiana, that included “The Killer” Jerry Lee Lewis in the rock field, and Jimmy Swaggart in the gospel arena. Both cousins are still alive (yes, even Jerry Lee.)

A few years ago, Mickey Gilley visited the “Huckabee” show along with fellow “Urban Cowboy” star Johnny Lee (“Looking for Love in All The Wrong Places.”) You can relive that moment here.

https://youtu.be/A8yVGnQqNxs

Rest in peace, Mickey.

* * *

Just a quick note on this year’s inductees into the “Rock and Roll” Hall of Fame. In the performer category, they are Pat Benetar and Neil Geraldo, Eurythmics (both deserved), Duran Duran (not my choice, but okay), Carly Simon, Lionel Richie (wait, wasn’t this supposed to be rock?), Dolly Parton (who unsuccessfully asked that her name be removed because she’s never even made a rock record) and Eminem (okay, this is definitely no longer a rock music Hall of Fame. Some of us would argue that that’s not even music.)

The Hall’s CEO defended Eminem’s induction by claiming he “emits the same feeling” as heavy metal does. If that means he induces headaches, I’ll grant that, but it’s not rock. Actual metal pioneers Judas Priest finally got a “Musical Excellence Award,” but weren’t inducted as performers.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/rock-26-roll-hall-of-fame-who-are-the-2022-inductees-when-is-the-ceremony/ar-AAWVwiF

As has become a yearly tradition, here’s my very incomplete list of artists who have NOT been inducted into the alleged “Rock and Roll” Hall of Fame so they can make room for people like Eminem, Jay-Z, Dolly Parton, etc.:

Jethro Tull; The Monkees; Mott the Hoople; The Jam; Ted Nugent; Dick Dale; Herman’s Hermits; Blue Oyster Cult; The Guess Who; King Crimson; Thin Lizzy; Robin Trower; Emerson Lake & Palmer; Iron Maiden; Devo; Paul Revere and the Raiders; Styx; Tommy James and the Shondells; Boston; Steppenwolf; America; The Grass Roots; Jan and Dean; Motorhead; Neil Sedaka; Badfinger; the MC5; The New York Dolls; Grand Funk Railroad; Slade; Joe Walsh; Three Dog Night; Warren Zevon; Link Wray; Meat Loaf; Vanilla Fudge; Blood, Sweat and Tears; Jonathan Richman and the Modern Lovers; J. Geils Band; Bad Company; neither Johnny nor Edgar Winter; Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels; Peter Frampton, Johnny Burnette; Ten Years After; Johnny Rivers; The B-52s and many more.

Mike Huckabee

Last night, Tucker Carlson put together a long, looooong list of people and things that incoming White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has publicly declared to be racist. A small sampling:

Fox News is racist (partly because they called COVID 19 the Wuhan virus, just like CNN and MSNBC used to when they were telling the truth about it); voter ID laws (supported by 69% of black voters and 75% of Hispanic voters) are racist; Brexit (the movement among Britons to leave the European Union) is racist; Republicans who criticized white Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam for being photographed in a KKK outfit are racist for some reason; and most surprising to me, as Tucker put it, “Mike Huckabee. He seems nice…but he’s RAAACIST!!”

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6305911629112#sp=show-clips

This sort of kneejerk accusation of racism appears to be a habit with Ms. Jean-Pierre (she also seems to be, by the Democrats’ own definition, a conspiracy theorist, disinformation peddler and insurrectionist.)

https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/05/incoming-biden-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-in-2020-fox-news-is-racist/

Just as our new Disinformation Czarina likes to sing the score from “Mary Poppins,” I can imagine her warbling the “Avenue Q” ditty, “Everyone’s a Little Bit Racist.” Only in this White House, it wouldn’t be a solo number, it would be a chorus.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-new-book-adviser-told-biden-white-people-incredibly-racist

Still, I never imagined when I was a young pastor risking a job I desperately needed by telling my church’s biggest donors that they could find another church if they didn’t like me welcoming black people to our congregation that one day, the official spokesperson for the White House would declare me to be a racist. Believe me, after decades of preaching that racism is a deplorable sin against God, in whose image we are all made, it was as big a shock to me as it was to you to discover what a big racist I am.

But then, you have to understand that, like people who refer to every political opponent as a Nazi or “literally Hitler,” the left has shamefully devalued the word “racist” by applying it to everyone they disagree with. This practice is disgusting because there are some words that should retain their powerful, odious meanings and be used only when truly justified. For instance, I don’t go around calling everyone on the left a “communist,” even though the term fits some of them so well that they proudly adopt it themselves.

Sadly, in political circles, toxic words like “racist” (and the rest of the Modern Dem Quartet: “sexist,” “homophobe” and “transphobe”) have become empty syllables to be thrown like custard pies at anyone you want to humiliate in public. I suppose I should consider it a weird kind of reverse honor, like this Administration’s version of a Presidential medal. It means I’m making arguments that they consider to be a threat to their power, but they have no rational or evidence-based response, so they try to hang the “Racist” medal around my neck to prevent people from listening.

No, thanks. I revile the word and reject the allegation, but I do appreciate your acknowledgement of my effectiveness.

Mike Huckabee

In our May 9 report on the judge’s latest rulings in the Michael Sussmann trial, we mentioned the following:

“On the downside, this judge doesn’t want to bring in evidence of the ‘joint venture’ among Sussmann, Joffe and the Clinton campaign to smear Trump with the Alfa Bank story, because Sussmann hasn’t been charged with conspiracy. The judge said he doesn’t want to ‘confuse the jury’ and ‘distract from the issues at hand.’”

At the time, we didn’t buy his excuse—I mean, reason. And sure enough, it’s this ruling that has Margot Cleveland concerned about how politics might be playing a part with this judge, Obama appointee U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper. This judge, she said, “let politics trump the law.” Though she finds his “baseline” to be apolitical, mostly even-handed, sometimes he veers from that. We, too, notice that this happens when the facts at issue tend to get too ‘warm’ –- that is, too close to Hillary and her campaign.

Durham had argued that various emails, even if they were hearsay, were still admissible under the “co-conspirator statement” exception to the hearsay rule. But to rule in Durham’s favor, the judge would essentially be acknowledging that Hillary For America was a co-conspirator.

As Cleveland explains this, a “conspiracy” isn’t necessarily criminal, and that this is why Durham is giving it the more benign term “joint venture. But to make an exception to the hearsay rule, the judge would have to find that “a preponderance of the evidence” supported a conspiracy or joint venture.

Judge Cooper balked at this. He said that for a variety of reasons, his court was exercising “its discretion not to engage of the kind of extensive evidentiary analysis that would be required to find that such a joint venture existed, and who may have joined it.”

Cleveland explains why, given the witnesses from Georgia Tech who are slated to testify at the trial, there would be no need for an “extensive evidentiary analysis.” Durham’s office had even suggested in their brief that the judge could “preliminarily admit hearsay statements of co-conspirators, subject to connection through proof of conspiracy.” In other words, just wait and issue the ruling during the trial. She thinks the evidence of the joint venture is overwhelming, “easily satisfying the preponderance of evidence test.

She says Judge Cooper’s unwillingness to do this suggests politics at work. He’s not touching the issue of whether the Clinton campaign had conspired to peddle the Alfa Bank hoax. He’s even questioning the whole “joint venture” theory, saying the “contours” of it and its participants are “not entirely obvious.” Cleveland senses that this case “is political to its core,” just like the entire Russia Hoax.

I forgot my magic mind-reading cap today, but it sure looks as though this judge is protecting the Democrats, and, specifically, Hillary Clinton, the queen mother of scandal.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/09/spygate-judge-tries-to-protect-hillary-clinton-in-latest-pre-trial-rulings/

The Washington Times got the same impression.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/may/9/judge-limits-evidence-clinton-campaign-sussmann-tr/?cx_testId=16&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=1&cx_experienceId=EX8EVP8I1R8R&utm_source=piano&utm_medium=in-article&utm_campaign=3_item_Pos_1_desktop#cxrecs_s

A while back, we reported on the stunning conflicts of interest this judge has, including the fact that his wife, Amy Jeffress, has represented one of the people most closely involved with the Russia Hoax, Lisa Page. We thought then, how does this judge get this case? How can this judge NOT be political?

Mike Huckabee

There’s just one week to go before the Michael Sussmann trial starts in federal court. Last week, we discussed the material that Special Counsel John Durham wanted to include but that the defense was working to exclude. U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled on that last Friday; Nick Arama at RedState has a good summary.

https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2022/05/08/durham-gets-mixed-bag-decision-on-motion-but-clinton-team-still-up-a-creek-without-paddle-n561670

He sees Durham as being limited by this in some respects but still able to get most of his big-picture evidence in. On the downside, this judge doesn’t want to bring in evidence of the “joint venture” among Sussmann, Joffe and the Clinton campaign to smear Trump with the Alfa Bank story, because Sussmann hasn’t been charged with conspiracy. The judge said he doesn’t want to “confuse the jury” and “distract from the issues at hand.”

On the upside, evidence of the charged offense (the lie about working on behalf of Hillary’s campaign and Rodney Joffe) and also of Sussmann’s motive will be allowed in. That includes “evidence of Mr. Sussmann’s client work.” Joffe hasn’t been granted immunity and will have to testify, though this means the prosecution will have to steer clear of whether his actions were “objectionable or illegal,” and also any questions about the accuracy of his data.

But in another development, just as Sussmann’s attorneys, from the Democrat-connected firm Latham and Watkins, are trying to keep Durham’s evidence out, they’ve got their own “evidence” that they want the judge to let in. And what they want to use it for is essentially to put President Trump on trial for colluding with Russia. I am not kidding.

Think of it: they’re in federal court with a Washington DC jury that is probably very biased against Trump. They want to make this case not about their client but about...Evil Orange Man...and his Russia affiliations. For that, they have “evidence” they want to bring in, including a series of over 20 news articles about Trump and Russia that appeared between mid-May and mid-August of 2016.

News flash: articles such as these are not evidence of anything. Or, in Durham’s more lawyerly way of putting it, they have “no evidentiary or factual basis.” Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if Sussmann had planted some of those stories himself. That was part of the “circular reporting” strategy used by Clinton’s henchmen and even the FBI to advance the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory. It’s even part of how the FBI got their warrant to spy on Trump’s campaign, right along with the phony Steele “dossier.” Hey, how about reading excerpts from THAT to the jury?

As Cleveland describes it, “...the media coverage Sussmann seeks to present to the jury is a tour de force of the press pushing the Russia collusion hoax.” One of the articles she mentions quotes Hillary campaign manager Robby Mook, who generally gets credit for launching the whole fake Trump-Russia story. He did this live on the CNN convention floor, to distract from the breaking story about the DNC sabotaging Bernie Sanders’ campaign. These fairy tales are supposed to be evidence...of what?

But Sussmann’s attorneys want to include them to show that their client had genuine concerns that the Alfa Bank story was real. They think that if they can get a DC jury to believe he felt this way, the jury will let him off for lying. Unbelievable.

Cleveland says that even if the judge excludes this “evidence” as prejudicial, Sussmann can still make the argument on the stand, saying that he “approached the FBI out of a genuine concern for our national security.” Oh, brother. But if he shovels it on thick, a Trump-hating jury might just cut him a break.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/06/clinton-lawyer-michael-sussmanns-latest-defense-strategy-litigate-trump-russia-collusion-lies/

Mike Huckabee

There’s a book and a documentary about the National Lampoon magazine whose title is a quote from the movie “Animal House.” It’s called “A Futile and Stupid Gesture.” If anyone ever writes the history of this era when Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi ran Congress, they’ll have to borrow that title because instead of good, compromise legislation to lift all Americans, what we got instead was a series of doomed futile and stupid gestures. Now, brace yourself for yet another one.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/05/democrats-to-force-vote-on-codifying-roe-v-wade-next-week/

Next week, Senate Democrats plan to force a vote to codify Roe v. Wade into federal law (although as I’ve already told you, that’s not even true. They basically want to make California's abortion law federal law. If they codified Roe, it would ban most abortions past mid-pregnancy, which is what most Americans want, and the Senate Democrats never do what most Americans want.)

This is a futile and stupid gesture because they don’t have 60 votes to overcome the filibuster, and they don’t have 51 votes to kill the filibuster, so they already know it’s not going to pass. But it will give them a chance to waste lots of our time and money waving their arms, pointing fingers, calling names and firing up their base with false accusations and utter nonsense. Still, better they should do that than actually pass any more awful legislation, so have at it.

Incidentally, here’s a look at just how radical and unserious the Democrats’ abortion bill is.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/05/06/democrats-quietly-scrub-abortion-bill-language-saying-men-can-get-pregnant/

To make it look somewhat like an actual law, they had to take out a lot of loaded PC buzzwords like white supremacy, gender oppression and reproductive justice; and to appease their base, they had to add some word salad about protecting the right to abortion for anyone with the “capacity for pregnancy,” including “transgender men, non-binary individuals, those who identify with a different gender, and others.” I assume by “others,” they mean “women,” who (pardon my triggering hate speech) are still the only people who can get pregnant.

I’d suggest that they take a Biology 101 course, but these days, it’s not likely students will learn any facts about the birds and the bees there, except maybe that a male bee can give birth to a bird if it identifies as a female bird. Probably a cuckoo. Here’s an example of the kind of Dr. Frankenstein’s Cookbook that passes for medical textbooks these days. I warn you, once you read this, you won’t be able to unread it.

https://redstate.com/alexparker/2022/05/06/report-university-schools-midwifery-students-on-the-handling-of-the-birthing-penis-n561117

Mike Huckabee

To sum up this past week, Spencer Brown at Townhall.com recaps some of the left’s most ludicrous and hysterical reactions to the leak of the SCOTUS draft ruling on Roe v. Wade. From their reactions, you’d think it was not only going to ban abortion, but also interracial marriage, contraceptives and owning more than five cats. Their bonkers response is perfectly encapsulated in the title: “Did Democrats Even Read the Leaked SCOTUS Draft?

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/spencerbrown/2022/05/05/unserious-democrats-spread-false-claims-about-overturning-roe-n2606806?utm_campaign=rightrailsticky3

Personally, I suspect they haven’t read most things they get spitting mad over, from “Huckleberry Finn” to the Constitution. If they think all this lunatic behavior will help them in November, they obviously haven’t yet read a new CNN poll, taken after the SCOTUS leak. It found that while the abortion issue has increased voter enthusiasm among Democrats, it’s increased it even more among Republicans, and “the overall picture for the midterm elections is little changed after this week’s news.” Yes, this is actually from CNN:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/06/politics/cnn-poll-abortion-midterms-roe-v-wade/index.html

“The share of registered voters who say they are extremely or very enthusiastic about voting this fall rose 6 points between the first survey and the second, but that increase is about even across party lines. Among Democrats, 43% now say they are extremely or very enthusiastic, up 7 points. Among Republicans, it’s 56%, up 9 points. And voters who say overturning Roe would make them 'happy' are nearly twice as enthusiastic about voting this fall as those who say such a ruling would leave them 'angry' (38% extremely enthusiastic among those happy, 20% among those angry).”

The poll also found that while majorities don’t want Roe overturned, and if it is, want a national law allowing abortion, it’s not the primary issue driving most voting decisions. In fact, the Republican edge over Democrats on the generic ballot actually increased since the previous poll to 49-42%.

I also have a feeling the enthusiasm to rush to vote Democrat to protect abortion will also wane as time goes by and people realize just how much of what they’re currently hearing is groundless hysteria completely unhinged from fact. Even Bill Maher is already pointing that out.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/bill-maher-roe-v-wade-abortion-scotus

For the record, longtime Democrat strategist Doug Schoen is also trying to warn the Party that they’re deluding themselves about unfettered abortion being a winning issue, but I doubt they’ll listen to him any more than they do me.

https://www.dailynews.com/2022/05/06/the-supreme-court-overturning-roe-wont-boost-democrats-chances-in-the-midterms/

Mike Huckabee

Mike Huckabee