Good morning!

Blessings on you and your family, and from all the Huckabee staff!

Today's newsletter includes:

• Bible Verse Of The Day
• "Trump's Impeachment Trial, the Sequel"
• Super Bowl Recap
• Impeachment II
• "Burn It All Down"
• Election 2020 News Roundup (Yes, It's Still Going On!)

Sincerely,

Mike Huckabee

BIBLE VERSE OF THE DAY 

"Trump's Impeachment Trial, the Sequel"

By Mike Huckabee

As baseball great Yogi Berra said, “It’s deja vu all over again.” Didn’t we already go through a Trump impeachment trial? Gosh, time flies; that was a little over a year ago, when we should have been focusing rapt attention on more important things, such as a tiny virus making its way from Wuhan, China, to America, during the early stages of a growing pandemic.

But nothing is as important as attacking Donald Trump. For that, everything that normally would be on the agenda must be set aside, as if nothing else is happening in the world. A virus doesn’t put itself on hold.

Well, Trump-haters can’t go much longer than a year without impeaching and trying him all over again, even when he’s no longer in office, so settle in for “Trump's Impeachment Trial: the Sequel.” And, again, we have the virus, only now it’s full-blown and even mutating. This time we also have the looming prospect of unchecked immigration (as Americans are still masked-up to “stop the spread” –- makes no sense) and el presidente de Mexico getting ticked-off about invading Guatamalans, thanks to Biden’s insane new border policy. Still, everything going on in Washington DC will be tabled, probably for about a week, as they pull out all the stops to remove a President who is already gone.

Wisely, Trump won't participate in this charade at all. But as we reported last week, House Impeachment Manager Jamie Raskin of Maryland wrote him to call for his testimony under oath during the proceedings. In an unbelievable letter, he let Trump know that if he didn’t testify, his refusal to do so would be used against him by senators to assume guilt.

"If you decline this invitation,” Raskin wrote, “we reserve any and all rights, including the right to establish at trial that your refusal to testify supports a strong adverse inference regarding your actions (and inaction) on Jan. 6, 2021.” Um, has Raskin not HEARD of the Fifth Amendment? They don’t have such a right.

Smarmy California Rep. Eric Swalwell pulled a similar stunt during the first impeachment, when he said Trump’s citing of a defense such as privilege to avoid handing over documents should be taken as evidence of guilt on the underlying accusations. Swalwell, who is not above cozying up to Chinese spies while sitting on the House Intelligence Committee, has long demonstrated that he will repeat any lie and violate any principle for the sake of his party.

Anyway, legal expert Jonathan Turley, in a piece for FOX NEWS that appeared over the weekend, said that this idea of inferring guilt “contradicts not just our constitutional principles but centuries of legal writing.” He called the letter from Raskin “extraordinary and chilling.”

Turley rejects the idea that many have spouted that an impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. It’s simple even for a layperson like me to see why. If there were no legal moorings whatsoever, legislators could treat their “victim” virtually any way they chose. If something as basic as the Fifth Amendment isn’t to be taken seriously, we really are in banana-republic territory.

Yes, these are politicians –- first and foremost --- but as Turley pointed out, they are also bound by oath to abide by the standards and procedures laid out by the Constitution for impeachments. In other words, the accused do have rights, and the Senate doesn’t get to throw those rights out the window. They’ll sure try, though. As Turley put it, “No principle seems inviolate when it stands in the way of a Trump prosecution.”

“This is not a political exercise,” he said. “This is a constitutional exercise...It would make this process a mockery if, in claiming to uphold constitutional values, members like Raskin destroy the very foundation of constitutional rights.”

"It is true that this is not a criminal trial,” he said. “It is a constitutional trial. As such, the Senate should try an accused according to our highest traditions and values. That includes respecting the right to remain silent and not to have ‘inferences’ drawn from the fact that (like prior Presidents) Trump will not be present at the trial or give testimony.” Turley also cited decisions in two cases that make it very clear how important the Supreme Court thought this was, and he showed that Congress has historically amplified this right in the wording of laws it has passed.

He closed his piece with a zinger: “This is not the first time that reason has been left a stranger in our age of rage. There appears no price too great to pay to impeach or prosecute Trump. Now, the House is arguing against one of the very touchstones of our constitutional system and legal experts are silent."

Well, most legal experts. Fortunately, there are a few, such as Turley and Alan Dershowitz, who brave the tide of cancel culture and speak out for the Constitution. But this is rare.

For example, it certainly would have been helpful if Chief Justice John Roberts had commented on his decision not to preside at the trial. Perhaps, as I’ve speculated, he reasoned that his non-action should speak for itself. All right, Justice Roberts, it tells me that you think the so-called impeachment trial of a former President is not part of your constitutional duty and is, in fact, not a real trial. So far, they certainly haven’t been conducting it as one, and I don’t expect that to get better. One clue: Sen. Patrick Leahy is officiating.

For readers with a premium subscription to THE EPOCH TIMES (highly recommended), Jack Phillips has a good commentary on Turley’s concerns.

Finally, as we await Leahy’s opening gavel, evidence continues to grow that the “insurrection” Trump is accused of “inciting” was planned well in advance, with some activity going back as far as November and accelerating after Christmas. They used social media to set up training, case locations, identify commanders on the scene, and request cash in addition to combat and communication gear. John Solomon says that over half a dozen have already been charged for conspiracy to commit violence because of activity predating January 6.

Because of the established timeline, we already knew that the people involved in the incident were already at the Capitol Building, far away from Trump, and weren’t even hearing his speech.

Two questions: 1) How much did the FBI know about this plan in advance of the Trump rally? And, 2) is it even possible --- is it in their DNA --- for Democrats (or at least the ten Republicans going along with this circus) to realize and admit they were WRONG? As Ken Starr said, “[House lawmakers] made a huge, colossal mistake. So walk back, and apologize to the former President, apologize to the American people [saying] that ‘I never should have voted in favor of this without the benefit of all the facts. I rushed to judgment.’”

Don't look for anything that sensible to happen. As Yogi Berra also said, "The future ain't what it used to be."

TO LEAVE ME A COMMENT, PLEASE CLICK HERE>>>

Super Bowl Recap

By Mike Huckabee

Congratulations to Tampa Bay quarterback Tom Brady, who set three new records by winning his 7th Super Bowl (or as I now call it, “The Woke Bowl”) out of 10 appearances and by being the oldest player ever in the Super Bowl. Brady struck a massive blow against ageism by showing up the critics who said he was past his prime at 43.

Of course, that didn’t stop the criticism on Twitter that it was somehow racist of him to win the Super Bowl against the Chiefs’ black quarterback Patrick Mahomes during Black History Month. No, seriously. As this article assures us, this is not the Onion. But I do hope that at least some of the tweets they quote were meant sarcastically.

Of course, many people only tune in to the Super Bowl to see the commercials. Here’s a site where you can watch the best (and the worst, if you must) ads without having to endure the politics and virtue-signaling.

But this is my choice for the best Super Bowl ad, and I wonder if its makers realized just how pro-life it is:

Finally, how about a moratorium on celebrities preaching to us over tinkly, minor key piano music about the importance of “unity,” now that their preferred leftist pols are in power and waging war on conservatives? Instapundit reminds us of how Bruce Springsteen, Jeep’s chosen spokesman for “unity,” has practiced it for the past four years, along with more good commentary on how "woke" politics have ruined the Super Bowl, just like they ruin everything they touch.

Be sure to click on the first story at that link for the Babylon Bee’s hilariously spot-on satirical report about how advertisers now create commercials designed not to sell their products, but to keep leftist Twitter mobs from attacking them.

Impeachment II

By Mike Huckabee

The Trump “impeachment” trial in the Senate may be a waste of time and money and an embarrassment to the Democrats who brought it, but you might want to watch Trump’s defense anyway. His attorneys promise to respond to the charges with some video that will be very entertaining. I also love the fact that the “news” channels that are itching to see Trump depicted as some sort of unique monster who urges violence on his political opponents will be forced to air it. Although tif I were a betting man, I’d lay odds that this is where they’ll cut to commercial.

PS – In a related story, Rep. Maxine Waters is claiming that she never said anything that could be construed as encouraging violence against Trump officials. Apparently, she thinks we all have the long-term memory of fruit flies. We don’t, but like Trump’s attorneys, we do have video of her and some of her radical Democrat colleagues speaking. Let’s go to that!

"Burn It All Down"

By Mike Huckabee

Over the weekend, while Democrats were gearing up to “impeach” a President who’s been gone since last month for allegedly inciting a riot that we now know was being planned over a month before he gave the speech in which he urged his followers to peacefully protest, BLM and Antifa protesters continued to riot across the nation. That includes Washington, DC, where on Saturday, far-left rioters attacked police and marched through the streets chanting, “Burn it all down.”

If this was taken as insurrection, a coup attempt or a call to overthrow the government, it wasn’t reported that way, nor have I heard any demands for impeachment or resignations from the many Democrat Congress members who have excused, defended and encouraged this sort of thing over the past year, until it came from the right and happened in their own building.

Reminder: Vice President Kamala Harris, then a Senator, promoted a fund to bail out protesters in Minneapolis so they could go right back to rioting and looting. Think that’s hyperbole? From last August, here are a few of the patriotic citizens she helped return to the streets…

While we all wait patiently for the media to demand impeachment trials for the Democrats who supported and continue to tacitly support violent rioters who serve their own political ends, here’s what a retired veteran Chicago police officer and rep for the National Police Association had to say about the media obsession with one riot while they ignore “the other 99 percent of violent riots that American law enforcement has been dealing with for the past almost year.”

Election 2020 News Roundup (Yes, It's Still Going On!)

By Mike Huckabee

 Twitter indefinitely suspended the account of the Gateway Pundit after the site announced that it would be releasing newly-discovered video showing late night deliveries of tens of thousands of illegal ballots eight hours after the deadline in Detroit.

The site said this is in response to “fact-checkers” dismissing all claims of election chicanery, such as those Mike Lindell put in his video at www.michaeljlindell.com.

So far, the most comprehensive rebuttal to Lindell’s video, and the most professional, least partisan and snarky, is from LeadStories.com, although that site does have a tendency to accept denials from the targets of accusations as exculpatory evidence.

If only someone had suggested right after the election that Biden join Trump in demanding a transparent, bipartisan investigation of all claims of election regularities, so that a cloud of suspicion wouldn't hang over his Administration. Oh wait, I remember: I did that, and the left attacked me for it.

But putting all the talk of cyber vote espionage aside, as I already explained, you can accept that all the ballots were legitimate and still legitimately believe that the election was stolen due to collusion between powerful media, social media, corporate and government forces to manipulate voters by promoting or suppressing information. Indeed, Time magazine just admitted this happened, only they insist it wasn’t “stealing the election,” it was “fortifying” democracy, because the “right” candidate won (that being the candidate Time deemed the “right” one.)

Mark Tapscott at PJ Media has more on the thick blinders our self-appointed “philosopher kings” are wearing that make them think they were helping democracy by ensuring that the people were led to choose the candidate the elites preferred instead of the one who was actually standing up for them.

Speaking of voters being hoodwinked, how many Biden voters who thought they were just replacing mean tweets with moderate “normalcy” knew that they were signing up for stuff like this? "Catch and release" should be for fishing only.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s motto could be “Rules for thee but not for me.” She got her hair done while her constituents were banned from salons. She defended rioters who attacked Washington and praised environmental protesters who “occupied” her office, then wanted to impeach anyone who didn’t forcefully condemn the rioters who attacked the Capitol. She banned “gendered” language, then proudly described herself as a mother and grandmother. And now, she’s trying to dock the pay of Republican legislators by thousands of dollars for breaking a rule that she ignores herself.

SUBSCRIBE TO MY FREE, POLITICAL NEWSLETTER HERE---->