Advertisement

Immigration Poll

June 25, 2018

Judging by all the toupee-ablaze OUTRAGE at President Trump over his Administration’s handling of illegal immigrants, including the ever-popular comparisons to Hitler and slave owners, you’d think the vast majority of Americans want open borders and no enforcement of immigration laws.
Today's Commentary: Another "confidential human source" (SPY) approached Trump advisor -- New IRS form coming -- Charles Krauthammer -- Survey says -- South Dakota decision -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse

I wrestled with whether to comment on this or not because I didn’t want to call more attention to the sick comments of a drug-addled former celebrity, particularly when they called for violence against my own daughter and grandchildren.  But since it’s become a major news story, I feel I have to say something.  For the record, this person whom I shall not name has apologized.  He should, but that’s not good enough.  I am a patient and forgiving man, but I am fed up with leftists launching sick, obscene attacks and calling for violence that could incite their unstable followers to harm innocent people -- and not just adults they disagree with politically, but now, their innocent children -- and then skirting responsibility.


 RECOMMENDED FOR YOU: A resposne to Laura Bush


Even though I have my own very firm political views, I try hard not to be partisan when it comes to issues of personal behavior.  I have criticized President Trump when I thought his rhetoric went too far or his policies were off-target.  I called for Roseanne to lose her TV show after she wrote an offensive tweet about Valerie Jarrett, even though I have no love for Ms Jarrett’s works and Roseanne at least had the excuse that she is self-admittedly mentally ill.  But the recent spate of reprehensible personal attacks and calls for violence on the left is inexcusable. 

 

The intern who shouted the F-word at President Trump during his Congressional visit should be fired immediately.  As should the DOJ employee who was found to be among the Democratic Socialists group that forced the Homeland Security director to have to leave a restaurant under threat. 

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/21/doj-employee-among-those-heckling-dhs-boss-nielsen-report-says.html

 

Tweets such as those made by the ‘60s burnout actor referenced above should be dealt with as criminal actions, because free speech does not protect people who incite violence and make threats.  I don’t care that he’s since apologized and deleted them.  No decent human being would ever have even thought of writing them in the first place.  

 

Personally, I’ll not be satisfied until this aged, bitter, hateful, and violent creep gets arrested.  And I pray for him that NO ONE EVER encourages violence and criminal actions against his grandchildren.  But this kind of vile behavior will continue until smug, self-righteous, drug-addled losers like him are held accountable. 

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/melania-calls-secret-service-after-peter-fonda-threatens-to-rip-barron-from-her-arms/

 

Sadly, he wasn’t alone in his disgusting calls for violence, as the leftist group Occupy Wall Street used Twitter not only to call for deadly attacks on immigration enforcement officers but to give instructions on how to do it (by the way, how does Twitter manage to police and ban every user who expresses a conservative opinion, yet these vermin still have Twitter accounts?)  

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/occupy-wall-street-if-you-encounter-an-ice-agent-put-a-knife-in-his-chest/

 

Being “passionate” about some issue in the news that you don't even understand is not an excuse for inciting violence against innocent men, women and children.  That's not being “passionate,” that's being sick, childish, thoughtless and vile.

 


Commentary continues below advertisement


It’s especially ironic that this should come on the very same day that Rep. Steve Scalise was able to return to the baseball diamond for the first time, exactly one year since he was nearly murdered by a deranged leftist gunman, inspired by overheated political rhetoric to try to slaughter as many Republican Congress members as possible at a charity baseball game practice.  It was only due to the swift, heroic response by police that he didn’t accomplish his planned massacre, which has oddly become one of the few shootings that the media never seem to want to talk about.

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/steve-scalise-makes-incredible-first-pitch-play-immediately-mobbed-by-teammates/

 

And yet, even after that, some people still refuse to examine their own actions and words.

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/democrat-pac-says-take-out-steve-scalise-the-gop-rep-shot-by-crazed-leftist/

 

There is a character in the movie “Forrest Gump” who said something that’s become a meme on many conservative websites.  Wesley, the hippie boyfriend of Forrest’s love, Jenny, after beating her up, tried to weasel out of responsibility by saying, “Things got a little out of hand. It’s just this war and that lying son of a b**** Johnson.”  But of course, he didn’t beat his girlfriend because the President or his policies drove him to it.  He did it because he was a violent, immature, self-centered, hypocritical jerk.

 

Anyone who commits or foments violence against others and tries to blame it on the President or political policies they disagree with is no better than that scumball.  Shame on them.  They don’t belong on movie or TV screens or on social media.  They need to spend a long time looking inside themselves and reflecting on what they’ve said and done and what they have become.  Preferably during a stay in a federal prison.  

  

 

 LEAVE ME A COMMENT BY CLICKING HERE.  I READ THEM!

Today's Commentary: Hillary intended to break law, FBI intended to absolve her -- Major figures AWOL from hearings -- Congressional Democrats get what they wanted -- US withdraws from Human Rights Council -- Keeping up with the fallout -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse
For those still contending that “there’s nothing to see here” in the investigation of the FBI’s handling of the Clinton and Trump investigations, please note that this week...
We were right about the news cycle being dominated by the hysteria about crying children at the border for yet another day; hardly anyone other than FOX News covered the Inspector General’s testimony before congressional committees on Tuesday.
The news that an Islamic reform group had received an apology and a nearly $3.4 million settlement from the Southern Poverty Law Center for falsely branding them as “anti-Islam extremists” has emboldened more defamed groups to stand up to the SPLC.
Today's Commentary: Horowitz hearing was Tuesday's REAL news story -- Good advice from Hollywood -- Obamacare nightmare -- Comey under investigation -- Democrats rush again -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse

A response to Laura Bush

June 19, 2018

The wave of newfound outrage continues to roil among liberal celebrities, politicians and news media figures over the policy of separating children from their parents who try to cross the border illegally and putting the kids into detention centers.
Today's Commentary: Note to Horowitz: "Past department practices" could be rotten, too-- The Peter Strzok Files -- My Questions for IG Horowitz and Robert Mueller -- "They Never Learn File" -- SPLC fined and forced to apologize -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse
I’ve interviewed Rob Reiner on TV and think he’s a terrific film director. And while he and I certainly don’t agree on much politically, I’ve always found him to be...
Today's Commentary: 20 Questions for IG Michael Horowitz-- Peter Strzok -- Misunderstood question -- Open Arms -- SNL cast member speaks up -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse

Starting July 1, we will only send the Evening Edition to subscribers of that newsletter.  Please add your name here to receive these emails

 


Peter Strzok, the FBI agent whose opposition to Trump and support for Hillary were revealed in his text messages to his like-minded mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, pulled a surprise move over the weekend.  His attorney sent a letter to House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, saying that Strzok is willing to testify without immunity or invoking the Fifth Amendment and answer any questions.  The attorney writes, “Pete is central to this story. We should let the American people see who he really is.”  (I think the text messages gave us a pretty good idea of who he is, as did the transparent attempts to hide them for so long.)  Continuing: “He thinks that his position, character and actions have all been misrepresented and caricatured, and he wants an opportunity to remedy that.”

 

I assume we will hear more of the claim that those texts represented his personal, private political views and never influenced his professional decisions in any way.  We might also hear another excuse that’s been floated: that the anti-Trump texts were merely cover for the affair, so if his wife saw them, it would appear that he and Page were just talking politics.  Or that he was just saying those things to comfort his distraught girlfriend.  In other words, despite the obvious bend-over-backwards-to-exonerate-Hillary investigation and the bend-any-rule-to-ensnare-Trump investigation, we can believe that he was a completely honest professional of good character because the evidence that he wasn’t was a lie concocted either to cover up the affair he was having behind his wife’s back or to keep his mistress in a good mood.  That may require more bending than even the most flexible minds can handle without snapping.   

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/breaking-days-after-ig-report-release-strzok-announces-he-will-appear-before-congress/

 

 

 

A couple of updates to stories from last week: 

 

President Trump said he wouldn’t sign the compromise version of a House immigration reform plan, which threw GOP leaders for a loop after they put in a lot of effort to create a bill that would draw enough support to pass.  But the White House walked that back, with an unnamed senior official saying that Trump just misunderstood the question.  A statement was issued saying that Trump will sign either bill, both of which contain funding for a border wall.  More details here:

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/white-house-trump-supports-gop-leaders-immigration-bill/

 

Also, I linked to an article by legal expert Paul Rosenzweig explaining why the witness-tampering evidence against former Trump campaign official Paul Manafort seemed awfully “thin.”  He’s written an update admitting he must have been mistaken, since the judge ordered Manafort jailed.  He notes that the judge said she “struggled” with the decision, and he doesn’t cite any details that he got wrong.  But he assumes the case must be stronger than he assessed it to be, at least in the mind of the judge.  Considering some rulings we’ve seen from judges recently, I wouldn’t be so quick to assume that the law or evidence had anything to do with it, but here’s the link to his update just the same.

 

https://www.lawfareblog.com/my-mistakes-witness-tampering-case-against-manafort-and-inspector-general-report

 

 --------------------------------------

 

If you listen to certain prominent news sources (or get all your news from social media in the form of Democratic Underground memes), you might believe that America is a horrible place, filled with violent, narrow-minded, Republican-voting bigots who hate immigrants, which is loosely defined as everyone who is here and wasn’t born here, whether they followed the law and actually became an immigrant or just came across the border illegally.  It’s no wonder all the more tolerant, welcoming countries like Germany and France lecture us so much about our shortcomings. 

 

If any of that sounds true to you, then prepare to have your mind blown by reality.  According to the Pew Research Center, America has taken in more refugees than any other nation on Earth: about 3 million since 1980.  In fact, that’s more than all the other nations combined.  And there were no cutbacks or biases during Republican Administrations; during a 10-year period beginning under Bush in 2002, there was an increase in the number of immigrants granted refuge from African and Middle Eastern nations.  There’s more at the link, all of it destructive to the popular narrative.

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/anti-immigrant-americans-take-in-more-refugees-than-rest-of-the-world-combined/

 

 ------------------------------------------------------

 

It was no surprise when “Saturday Night Live” was blasted and abandoned by Republicans because of its unfunny, relentlessly anti-Trump sketches.  But then, even liberal media outlets such as Vice.com started to complaint that it wasn’t comedy anymore, just propaganda.  Former cast members, including Rob Schneider and Joe Piscopo, also weighed in on how the show had let its obvious bias kill the humor.  But its defenders dismissed all that criticism and scoffed that the older cast members were just out of touch.

 

Well, try this: the show has become so biased and predictable that even one of the current cast members has spoken up in hopes of changing it.  And that cast member is female and African-American, so if "SNL's" writers try to dismiss this criticism as “white male privilege,” it will be funniest thing they’ve come up with since the 2016 election.

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/snl-cast-member-growing-sick-of-politics-calls-for-show-to-feature-more-actual-comedy/


Commentary continues below advertisement


 ---------------------------------------------

A while back, when everyone was caught up in the debate over whether President Trump should sit down for questioning from Robert Mueller, I suggested a list of questions that Mueller should be asked by Trump.  Now that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz is about to sit for questioning by congressional committees, I thought I’d be similarly helpful with a list for Congress to use.  Devin Nunes surely doesn’t need my help on this, but, just for fun, here goes...

 

1.  Soon after Peter Strzok was named head of the FBI’s Trump/Russia probe, he texted Lisa Page that Trump won’t be President and that “we will stop it.”  Did you infer that he meant they’d stop Trump from getting elected, or did you think he might have meant something else, such as, “We will stop meeting for five-hour lunches”?

 

2.  When some of the Strzok-Page texts were made public, Strzok was demoted and now works in Human Resources.  He also maintains his security clearance.  If his appearance of bias was so detrimental to the FBI that he had to be removed from his job, do you see any irony in the fact that he’s now in Human Resources?  And what about the “appearance” of his continued security clearance?

 

3.  How did you even get those Strzok-Page texts when the FBI told Congress they were not obtainable?  Did you hire a family of Pakistani IT professionals to hack them?

 

4.  According to the report, Hillary’s classified emails were obtained by foreign governments and intelligence entities.   How many consecutive life sentences would be given to a submariner whose personal pictures on board his sub were similarly compromised?

 

5.  Peter Strzok was in charge of the FBI’s investigation of Trump “collusion” for its first nine months. If bias is not to affect the eventual determination by the special counsel --- or the public's perception of that determination--- shouldn’t the work of the team led by Strzok be tossed out?

 

6.  You say that there is no evidence in your report that anyone’s bias affected the conclusions reached by the FBI.  Question:  Have you read the report?

 

7.  How did Peter Strzok get the job of lead investigator in the Hillary email case?  Was Hillary herself not available to run it?

 

8.  Will Strzok finally be fired from the FBI by Christopher Wray, or will he be kept on and offered the exciting new anti-bias “training”?

 

9.  When “Agent 1” texted “Agent 5” the message “I’m with her,” did you infer that he was talking about Hillary Clinton, or did you think he might have been talking about some other female presidential candidate, such as Carly Fiorina, Geraldine Ferraro or Roseanne Barr?

 

10.  Why was no recording or transcript made of Hillary’s FBI interview?  Given the large budget for the FBI, couldn’t they have laid in a supply of pens and paper or found just one recording device?  Will there be “training” for office supply managers?

 

11.  Why was Hillary never asked about Bill’s meeting with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac five days before her interview?  Were investigators simply hesitant to ask her about ANY private meeting Bill had with ANY woman?

 



12.  If Comey was acting entirely on his own in being “insubordinate” and deciding not to charge Hillary, why was his statement to that effect passed around for editing and tweaking by numerous other FBI officials before she was interviewed?  Do you see this as collusion against Trump or simply a commendable display of teamwork?

 

13.  As you know, the DOJ and FBI have refused to give Congress key documents related to the FISA applications and spying on Trump campaign associates, even though they’ve been under subpoena for many months.  We know you're looking into that now, so have they given you access to those documents?

 

14.  If so, have you read them?

 

15.  Um, what do they say?

 

16.  Please, can you print us a copy?

 

17.  If you saw Strzok’s “we’ll stop it” text a month ago, why did you keep it from Congress all this time?  Were you concerned we might somehow conclude Strzok WAS trying to stop it, before we could see from your report that he really wasn’t?

 

18.  You worked hard on this report, and it is very long.  But its conclusion is so preposterous that even Trey Gowdy has come back to life.  Have you thought about entering one of the healing professions?

 

19.  Since you have condemned James Comey for “insubordination,” and we know he has lied and leaked to the media, do you think he’s a good star witness in Mueller’s case against Donald Trump, or in any case against anyone at any time?

 

20.  You wrote, “We found no evidence that the conclusions by the prosecutors were affected by bias or other improper considerations; rather, we determined that they were based on the prosecutors’ assessment of the facts, the law, and past department practice.”  May we at least conclude from that sentence that the prosecutors might want to plead insanity, as they can't tell right from wrong?

 

21.  (Bonus question)  When you wrote that sentence, were you high?

                                    

 

LEAVE ME A COMMENT BY CLICKING HERE.  I READ THEM! 

 

 

Paul Manafort, who was briefly Donald Trump’s campaign manager, has been ordered to jail for allegedly attempting to tamper with witnesses...
Inspector General Michael Horowitz may have declined to confirm the cause-and-effect relationship between stunning anti-Trump bias at the FBI and the outcome of Hillary’s email case, but all the evidence of vicious partisanship is there in his report.
Thursday, the New York Attorney General filed a lawsuit against President Trump’s charity foundation, claiming that it illegally used money to settle disputes related to his business and gave charity donations, mostly to veterans groups, in ways that boosted his campaign.

Memory Lane

June 15, 2018

With jobless claims at a 44-year low, retail sales strong and consumer confidence at an 18-year high, the Atlanta Federal Reserve has raised its second quarter GDP growth estimate from 4.6% to 4.8%.
Today's Commentary: IG report details massive anti-Trump bias but still "gaslights" us --- Confusion reigns within America's universities -- Memory Lane -- Hillary investigation in one sentence -- Report reveals bribery -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse

Starting July 1, we will only send the Evening Edition to subscribers of that newsletter.  Please add your name here to receive these emails

 


The long-awaited IG report found that James Comey deviated from FBI and DOJ procedures in handling the probe of Hillary Clinton’s emails but found no evidence of political bias.  And Bonnie & Clyde deviated from the law in robbing banks, but they didn’t do it for the money.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-14/comey-broke-from-fbi-procedures-in-clinton-probe-watchdog-finds

 

 -----------------------------

Another Supreme Court decision has arrived in a flurry expected this month.  The SCOTUS voted 7-2 to strike down a Minnesota law banning voters from wearing political apparel such as partisan T-shirts or MAGA caps at the polls.  The case was brought by a voter who was told he had to remove his Tea Party shirt and “Please I.D. Me” button before being allowed to vote, which the SCOTUS ruled was a violation of his First Amendment free speech rights.

 

The majority held that states may ban campaign signs, solicitations and other direct attempts to influence voters in and near polling places to protect voters from the clamor and din of electioneering.  But extending that ban to passive, non-disruptive expressions of political views such as a voter’s own clothing is taking it too far.

 

So does this mean I can now vote while wearing a T-shirt with my daughter’s picture on it?  

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/14/supreme-court-strikes-down-minnesota-law-prohibiting-voters-from-wearing-political-apparel-to-polls.html

 

 -------------------------------

 

The Berkeley, California, City Council declared a “climate emergency” worse than World War II and voted to demand “humane population control.”  I say to them what I say to all radicals who demand we lower the population: “Okay, you go first.”

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/13/berkeley-declares-climate-emergency-worse-than-world-war-ii-demands-humane-population-control.html

 

 -------------------------------

 

At the New York Times, everything President Trump does is wrong, even when he does exactly what they advised him to do.

 

https://donsurber.blogspot.com/2018/06/nyt-columnist-attacks-trump-for.html

-------------------------------

For everyone who’s been asking me if it’s true my daughter Sarah is leaving the White House at the end of the year, I think I’ll let her respond.  She’s had even more experience dealing with fake news than I have.

 

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/06/14/sarah-sanders-punches-back-at-cbs-report-that-shes-leaving-the-white-house/

 

 ---------------------------------------

 



Here’s reason #3,934 why people are signing petitions to split off from California.  I should warn you that the link takes you to the type of content that should be seen by adults only.  Which is ironic, considering it’s a description of the graphic sex ed curriculum California public schools force on children.  Be grateful you at least have the option of whether or not to see it, because parents who don’t want their kids exposed to it are told, “Tough toenails” (FYI, that might the only body part not covered in the curriculum.)  But the schools say parents are permitted to tell their children if there are parts of it they disagree with.  How magnanimous of them to grant parents the privilege of free speech.  Wonder how long that will last?

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/calif-school-district-forbids-parents-to-remove-kids-from-graphic-sex-ed-class/

 

 ---------------------------------

 

 

This story features an interesting examination of the attempt to cite Scripture as an argument for lenient immigration and border control policies.  It includes the rationale of theologians on both sides of the issue.  Unfortunately, it doesn’t delve into why people who spend much of their time attacking or mocking Christians for believing in the Bible cite the Bible to support their positions when it’s convenient.  But we can probably figure that out without Divine intervention. 

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/watch-msnbc-host-questions-jim-jordans-christianity-for-wanting-to-enforce-immigration-policy/

 

 -------------------------------------

 

  

Those of you who never miss my TBN TV show “Huckabee” (and if you have missed it, you can see past episodes here, so there’s really no excuse:  https://www.tbn.org/programs/huckabee/episodes) will remember my April 28th interview with Cabot Phillips of CampusReform.org.  He’s the young man who bravely ventures out into America’s university campuses armed only with camera and microphone and asks students questions guaranteed to trigger them into running for the nearest Play Doh-equipped safe space.  Well, he has a new video up, and it’s a must-see.

 

In this one, he interviews George Washington University students about the Supreme Court decision in favor of Colorado Christian baker Jack Phillips.  The question: should a Christian baker be forced to take a job making a same-sex wedding cake if it violates his religious beliefs? 

 

The predictable response from some students who’ve spent too much time steeping in the PC culture of leftist professors: of course he should, because baking is his job and he has no right to say no to anyone.  As one poetically put it, “His ability to exercise his freedom of religion ends when that infringes on another person’s ability to be who they are.” 

 

Quite moving.  But hold on: there are follow-up questions.  What if the baker is Jewish; should he be forced to bake a cake for a Palestinian wedding?  What if he’s black; does he have to cater a KKK rally?  One young woman who sides with the Jewish and black bakers admits that she’s contradicting what she just said about the Christian baker.  What’s really happening is that she’s undergoing the uncomfortable process of having to examine something from a different point of view than she’s accustomed to, which used to be one of the main reasons for attending college before it was outlawed. 

 

Watch to the end: it’s surprising and heartening to see how many students actually side with religious freedom, including one who knows enough about the case to realize how badly Colorado authorities discriminated against the baker because of his religion.   

 

If I could add one more question, it would be, “If the baker were Muslim; should he be forced to cater a same-sex wedding reception?”  Only I wouldn’t ask that of students, I’d ask it of the people who keep filing lawsuits against Christian bakers that subject them to bankruptcy and death threats, but they never seem to target Muslim bakeries.  Is it because they fear Muslims would retaliate, because that's awfully Islamophobic? And if so, does that mean they only target people they think won’t fight back, since that’s the very definition of bullying, and I thought they were opposed to bullying? 

 

I read that during an acceptance speech on the Tony Awards, an actor in the gay-themed play “Angels in America” got a big ovation for taking a stand for tolerance by declaring, “Let’s just bake a cake for everyone who wants a cake to be baked!”  It was a perfect illustration of the lack of empathy in the insular world of the self-appointed tolerance police. 

 

Obviously, their definition of tolerance is a perfect world in which everyone sees things their way.  Real tolerance would be religious people not trying to force them to live in a way that complies with their sacred beliefs, and them not trying to force religious people to comply with things that violate their sacred beliefs.  No matter where you stand on any issue, using force of government to make everyone say and do only the things you approve of is not tolerance.  It’s totalitarianism.   

 

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11009


Commentary continues below advertisement


 

 -----------------------------------

 

 

I’m about to do something I don’t often do: I’m going to offer what I think is some good advice to the leadership of the Democratic Party.  The point I want to make may become clearer if we look at three stories in the news, side-by-side.

 

First, there is Cynthia Nixon, the “Sex And The City” star who is challenging Gov. Andrew Cuomo from the left (and you can imagine how far to the left you have to circle) in New York’s Democratic Primary.  She is a perfect representative of the type of people who are taking over the Party; if not the leadership, then at least the public image and state- and local-level offices.  These are the “progressives,” which I put in quotation marks because there’s nothing progressive about believing in ideas that have been tried for over a century and brought nothing but failure and misery every time. 

 

The far-left tail now seems to be wagging the dog, as the national party moves further left to accommodate the loudest, most activist part of its base, which refuses even to pretend to be moderate anymore.  Instead, they openly endorse policies such as socialism, open borders, amnesty and repeal of the Second Amendment that the national party has tried to paper over for years.  Ms Nixon represents that base well: she’s called for even higher taxes in New York to help fund her just-released education plan.  It includes barring Immigration enforcement agents from schools, easing disciplinary measures at schools with the highest suspension and arrest rates, and free college for all, including illegal immigrants.  

 

https://www.westernjournal.com/celeb-running-against-cuomo-ban-ice-give-illegals-free-college/

 

Now, if you listen to certain media outlets, you would think that stuff like this is the wave of the future.  It’s what intellectuals tell us will happen first in California and sweep eastward across the nation.  Before the Democratic leadership swallows that, let’s look at two other stories in this week’s news.

 

California activists just garnered over 402,000 signatures on a petition that will put a measure on the November ballot to split California into three states.  They would be North California, South California, and California, which would be a skinny strip along the coast where all the “progressives” can live like wild chimps in a nature preserve: free to do whatever they like, but no longer able to fling their poop at those around them.  (Personally, I would’ve proposed splitting it into two states: “Left California,” for multiple reasons, and “Wanted to Leave California.”)  

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/proposal-to-split-california-into-3-states-eligible-for-states-ballot-in-november

 

Meanwhile on the other coast, in deep blue New York, even among Democratic primary voters, the latest Siena poll shows Cynthia Nixon trailing Cuomo by 61-26%.  And the more she’s campaigned, the wider the gap has grown. 

 

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06/13/time-stick-fork-cynthia-nixons-campaign/

 

Put all this together and here’s what it means: even in the most liberal, coastal elitist states in America, far-left progressivism is a pitiful loser of a position with the vast majority of voters.  No, we are not “all socialists now.”  Believing your propaganda is how you end up losing about 1,000 elected offices over a decade.   

 

I offer this advice to the Democratic leadership for two reasons:  (1.) I sincerely hope you pull back from the cliff and move to the middle, for the sake of a healthy, two-party system.  And (2.) I have no illusions that you will actually listen to a word I try to tell you.

 

 


Commentary continues below advertisement


 ---------------------------------

 At this writing, we’re still waiting for the report from Inspector General Michael Horowitz on the FBI’s handling of the Hillary Clinton’s email case.  It’s scheduled to be released Thursday, with the President receiving it by midafternoon.  The version we see later in the day will no doubt contain some redactions, as the DOJ has had it over two weeks for “review.”  The President (being the President) had better receive both the redacted and unredacted versions, to be able to compare them and see what the DOJ is trying to withhold from Congress and the general public.

 

Keep in mind, this report doesn’t deal directly with the FBI’s investigation of Trump and alleged Russia “collusion,” or with the Mueller investigation that spun off from that.  It doesn’t examine the process for obtaining the FISA warrants to spy on Trump campaign associates.  But it deals with largely the same cast of characters at the FBI, and if it shows that Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page and the rest of that sorry lot were in the tank for Hillary, we’ll be able to infer a lot about their motivations regarding Trump.  In other words, if “the fix was in” for Hillary, we may assume “the knives were out” for Trump.

 

So that’s coming within hours.  In the meantime, I must say that the Rod Rosenstein story from yesterday --- concerning threats he made to members of Congress and their staff about putting their email and phone records under subpoena --- has caught fire.  The idea that such intimidation tactics might be used by bureaucrats against elected officials and their staffers who are trying to carry out their constitutional duties is just not in keeping with what we want our government to be here in America.  And as the story got around, it became increasingly clear that the Rosenstein temper is legendary and that similar threats have been made, in other meetings with lots of shouting.  Most of all, the story suggested how desperate the Department of “Justice” is to hide...what??...and how close the committees charged with oversight must be to finding it.

 

Andrew C. McCarthy has explained the legal implications of Rosenstein’s behavior in his latest column for NATIONAL REVIEW.  The great thing about it is that he places the contentious meeting in the context of what was going on five months ago, on January 10.  McCarthy reminds us that this was at a time when they were trying to maintain that they would never use unverified information in a FISA application.  They wanted us to believe that they would clearly inform the FISA court of the questionable origins and potential biases of the information supplied to them.  We found out only later that what they’d told us about the FISA application process was a pile of you-know-what.

 

McCarthy has done the heavy lifting for this latest piece, outlining in clear detail what is wrong with having the deeply conflicted Rosenstein play the role of FBI-head and Mueller’s supervisor.  (By the way, did you know McCarthy has just been hired as a FOX News contributor?  He’s been our go-to legal “advisor” for some time, adding greatly to our understanding of complex legal issues at a time when we really need that.)  He says he doesn’t know Rosenstein personally and is not attacking his integrity but theorizes that the conflicts he’s facing in his work are distorting his judgment.

 

I’m not sure I can cut Rosenstein that much slack.  What is it that has kept him from recusing himself, given those enormous conflicts?  Failure to do that is, in itself, a horrendously bad judgment call.  It’s even possible that he’s keeping some documents under wraps because they implicate HIM.  After all, he did sign one of the warrant renewals sent to the FISA court.  Whether or not that is true, just the appearance of something like that is one more reason he shouldn’t be anywhere near this case.

 

In fact, McCarthy makes a compelling argument that it doesn’t make sense for Jeff Sessions to recuse himself and Rosenstein not to, that in fact it should have been the opposite.  Rosenstein has to go, and all the documents must be disclosed.

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/rod-rosenstein-subpoena-threat-shows-conflict-of-interest/

 

 

 LEAVE ME A COMMENT BY CLICKING HERE.  I READ THEM!

At this writing, we’re still waiting for the report from Inspector General Michael Horowitz on the FBI’s handling of the Hillary Clinton’s email case.
Today's Commentary: More on Rosenstein: He has got to go! --- The results are in - a recap of Tuesday's primaries -- Joe Biden -- Diplomacy -- Must read -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse

Those of you who never miss my TBN TV show “Huckabee” (and if you have missed it, you can see past episodes here, so there’s really no excuse:  https://www.tbn.org/programs/huckabee/episodes) will remember my April 28th interview with Cabot Phillips of CampusReform.org.  He’s the young man who bravely ventures out into America’s university campuses armed only with camera and microphone and asks students questions guaranteed to trigger them into running for the nearest Play Doh-equipped safe space.  Well, he has a new video up, and it’s a must-see.

 

In this one, he interviews George Washington University students about the Supreme Court decision in favor of Colorado Christian baker Jack Phillips.  The question: should a Christian baker be forced to take a job making a same-sex wedding cake if it violates his religious beliefs? 

 

The predictable response from some students who’ve spent too much time steeping in the PC culture of leftist professors: of course he should, because baking is his job and he has no right to say no to anyone.  As one poetically put it, “His ability to exercise his freedom of religion ends when that infringes on another person’s ability to be who they are.” 

 



Quite moving.  But hold on: there are follow-up questions.  What if the baker is Jewish; should he be forced to bake a cake for a Palestinian wedding?  What if he’s black; does he have to cater a KKK rally?  One young woman who sides with the Jewish and black bakers admits that she’s contradicting what she just said about the Christian baker.  What’s really happening is that she’s undergoing the uncomfortable process of having to examine something from a different point of view than she’s accustomed to, which used to be one of the main reasons for attending college before it was outlawed. 

 

Watch to the end: it’s surprising and heartening to see how many students actually side with religious freedom, including one who knows enough about the case to realize how badly Colorado authorities discriminated against the baker because of his religion.   

 

If I could add one more question, it would be, “If the baker were Muslim; should he be forced to cater a same-sex wedding reception?”  Only I wouldn’t ask that of students, I’d ask it of the people who keep filing lawsuits against Christian bakers that subject them to bankruptcy and death threats, but they never seem to target Muslim bakeries.  Is it because they fear Muslims would retaliate, because that's awfully Islamophobic? And if so, does that mean they only target people they think won’t fight back, since that’s the very definition of bullying, and I thought they were opposed to bullying? 

 

I read that during an acceptance speech on the Tony Awards, an actor in the gay-themed play “Angels in America” got a big ovation for taking a stand for tolerance by declaring, “Let’s just bake a cake for everyone who wants a cake to be baked!”  It was a perfect illustration of the lack of empathy in the insular world of the self-appointed tolerance police. 

 

Obviously, their definition of tolerance is a perfect world in which everyone sees things their way.  Real tolerance would be religious people not trying to force them to live in a way that complies with their sacred beliefs, and them not trying to force religious people to comply with things that violate their sacred beliefs.  No matter where you stand on any issue, using force of government to make everyone say and do only the things you approve of is not tolerance.  It’s totalitarianism.   

 

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11009

 

LEAVE ME A COMMENT BELOW BY CLICKING HERE.  I READ THEM!

The Democrats' problem

June 14, 2018

I’m about to do something I don’t often do: I’m going to offer what I think is some good advice to the leadership of the Democratic Party.  The point I want to make may become clearer if we look at three stories in the news, side-by-side.

 

First, there is Cynthia Nixon, the “Sex And The City” star who is challenging Gov. Andrew Cuomo from the left (and you can imagine how far to the left you have to circle) in New York’s Democratic Primary.  She is a perfect representative of the type of people who are taking over the Party; if not the leadership, then at least the public image and state- and local-level offices.  These are the “progressives,” which I put in quotation marks because there’s nothing progressive about believing in ideas that have been tried for over a century and brought nothing but failure and misery every time. 

 

The far-left tail now seems to be wagging the dog, as the national party moves further left to accommodate the loudest, most activist part of its base, which refuses even to pretend to be moderate anymore.  Instead, they openly endorse policies such as socialism, open borders, amnesty and repeal of the Second Amendment that the national party has tried to paper over for years.  Ms Nixon represents that base well: she’s called for even higher taxes in New York to help fund her just-released education plan.  It includes barring Immigration enforcement agents from schools, easing disciplinary measures at schools with the highest suspension and arrest rates, and free college for all, including illegal immigrants.  


Commentary continues below advertisement


 

https://www.westernjournal.com/celeb-running-against-cuomo-ban-ice-give-illegals-free-college/

 

Now, if you listen to certain media outlets, you would think that stuff like this is the wave of the future.  It’s what intellectuals tell us will happen first in California and sweep eastward across the nation.  Before the Democratic leadership swallows that, let’s look at two other stories in this week’s news.

 

California activists just garnered over 402,000 signatures on a petition that will put a measure on the November ballot to split California into three states.  They would be North California, South California, and California, which would be a skinny strip along the coast where all the “progressives” can live like wild chimps in a nature preserve: free to do whatever they like, but no longer able to fling their poop at those around them.  (Personally, I would’ve proposed splitting it into two states: “Left California,” for multiple reasons, and “Wanted to Leave California.”)  

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/proposal-to-split-california-into-3-states-eligible-for-states-ballot-in-november

 

Meanwhile on the other coast, in deep blue New York, even among Democratic primary voters, the latest Siena poll shows Cynthia Nixon trailing Cuomo by 61-26%.  And the more she’s campaigned, the wider the gap has grown. 

 

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06/13/time-stick-fork-cynthia-nixons-campaign/

 

Put all this together and here’s what it means: even in the most liberal, coastal elitist states in America, far-left progressivism is a pitiful loser of a position with the vast majority of voters.  No, we are not “all socialists now.”  Believing your propaganda is how you end up losing about 1,000 elected offices over a decade.   

 

I offer this advice to the Democratic leadership for two reasons:  (1.) I sincerely hope you pull back from the cliff and move to the middle, for the sake of a healthy, two-party system.  And (2.) I have no illusions that you will actually listen to a word I try to tell you.

Today's Commentary: Rosenstein vs. House Intel: this is not gonna be pretty --- Andrew McCarthy sees yet another double standard -- Cowed by trolls -- Domino's Pizza steps up -- Pro-Trump PAC sues FEC -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse
I knew the anti-Trump elements in the media would never be able to give him any credit for his historic meeting with Kim Jong-Un, but I have to tip my MAGA cap to them...
One of the more surreal sidelights to the startling and momentous events in Singapore was an interview given by ex-NBA star Dennis Rodman to CNN.
I was anxiously awaiting the morning shows and headlines from the liberal media to see how they could possibly spin President Trump’s summit with Kim Jong-Un as a horrible, awful, no-good, very bad thing.
As predicted, today turned out to be a day that will go down in history. It’s the worst day ever for Robert DeNiro. And Stephen Colbert. And Joy Behar.
Today's Commentary: Historic moment: Trump meets Kim --- Dennis Rodman's emotional interview -- Liberal Media Spins North Korea Summit -- Rough translation -- Larry Kudlow -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse
Today's Commentary: Response to readers' comments (yes, I do read them!) --- Wild theory -- SCOTUS update -- Good news -- Legal Ade -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse

"Double Standards"

June 11, 2018

I’ve had commenters who haven’t kept up with what I’ve been writing or saying for the past 10 years or so accuse me of having a “double standard” in commenting on Presidents Trump and Obama.

Today's Commentary: Charles Krauthammer breaks some sad news --- Join me in Branson on June 12 -- Romney says Trump will be reelected -- Elizabeth Warren -- Desire for fair competition leads to protest -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse
There are hardly words adequate to describe the brilliance, good heart, and incredible example of FOX News contributor and Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Charles Krauthammer, nor to express how deeply saddened we are at the news he now shares with us.
Today's Commentary: Scientists discover Black Hole within DOJ --- Join me in Branson on June 12 -- Fancy Nancy -- Kim Kardashian gets results -- Nancy Drew -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse
In breaking news, a team of physicists, astronomers and mathematicians at MIT has completed a study of the U.S. Department of Justice headquarters that finds it to be the bureaucratic equivalent of a Black Hole for documents.

Negative Nancy

June 8, 2018

Back in the days when “Saturday Night Live” was funny, they used to do sketches about a character named “Debbie Downer.”
Today's Commentary: The IG report languishes at DOJ, Part II --- Join me in Branson on June 12 -- IG report remains in the hands of those it investigated -- McConnell cancels recess -- The Trump economy -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse

Today's Commentary: IG report remains in the hands of those it investigated --- Join me in Branson on June 12 -- This D-Day Anniversary -- "Where's Melania?" -- Steven Hayward's climate change -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse
For all of us who knew “the fix was in” on Hillary and the investigation of her mishandling of classified emails and destruction of evidence, the anticipation of Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report has been like waiting for Godot.

Kate Spade RIP

June 6, 2018

Sympathy and prayers today for the family of fashion designer Kate Spade.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced that due to the backlog of business caused by the Democrats’ lockstep obstructionism, he’s decided to cancel the August recess and make all Senators stay in DC and work instead of going home.

Kate Spade RIP

June 6, 2018

Sympathy and prayers today for the family of fashion designer Kate Spade.
Today's Commentary: Anti-Trump media obsess over "pardon" fantasy --- Join me in Branson on June 12 -- SCOTUS: 7-2 Decision in favor of Colorado baker -- Kristian Saucier -- Bill Clinton refuses to apologize -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse

No thank you Eagles

June 5, 2018

One of the inexplicably major stories of the day is President Trump rescinding a White House invitation to the Super Bowl champion Philadelphia Eagles.
One small part of a confidential letter written early this year to special counsel Robert Mueller by the Trump legal team (before Giuliani came aboard) and leaked to the New York Times had the anti-Trump media in a dither all day Monday.
During the 2016 election campaign, President Trump often compared Hillary Clinton to former Navy submariner Kristian Saucier to illustrate how the federal justice system was allegedly rigged to protect the powerful.

Today's Heroes

June 5, 2018

Today’s Huck’s Hero salute goes out to Utah-based trucker Darren Phillips, who was driving near Green River in Wyoming when he saw a state trooper wrestling with a driver he’d stopped for speeding.
First Lady Melania Trump has been out of the public eye for a few weeks, which seems perfectly normal considering she recently underwent kidney surgery.
Today's Commentary: Thanks, POLITICO, but I wasn't being POLITICAL --- Join me in Branson on June 12 -- Another round of primaries tomorrow -- Code violations -- Double standards -- Evening Edition - Daily Verse