Trump’s historic speech
President Trump made a historic speech to Congress last night.
Photo credit: Kevin Lamarque / Reuters
Blessings on you and your family from all the Huckabee team! Today’s newsletter is below.
P.S. The Morning Edition is a reader-supported publication. It delivers Monday-Saturday.
Daily Bible Verse
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
Matthew 18:20
Supreme Court sides with lower court against Trump administration
In breaking news on Wednesday morning, the Supreme Court sided with a lower court and ruled that the Trump Administration has to pay $2 billion in USAID contracts. Justices Roberts and Barrett sided with liberals, over the very strong dissent of Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.
The dissent reads, “Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned...”
“Today, the Court makes a most unfortunate misstep that rewards an act of judicial hubris and imposes a $2 billion penalty on American taxpayers…The relief ordered is, quite simply, too extreme a response. A federal court has many tools to address a party’s supposed nonfeasance. Self-aggrandizement of its jurisdiction is not one of them." Except it is now, apparently.
The ruling was a procedural decision, not based on merit. It also applies only to contracts where the work has already been completed and does not stop Trump from cutting or pausing contracts that are already underway or set for the future. So hang in there: the battle over whether the government is run by the people’s elected President or unelected judges and bureaucrats is far from over.
Trump’s historic speech
President Trump made a historic speech to Congress last night. If you missed it, it’s a must-see, and you can see it here:
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6369617793112
If you don’t have an hour and 40 minutes right now, here are what Fox News deemed the top five moments, but there were a lot more than that. They didn’t even include Trump calling Sen. Elizabeth Warren “Pocahontas” to her face or our favorite moment, Trump reading the list of outrageous spending grants identified by DOGE that would be funny if they weren’t so infuriating (Trump somehow made them funny anyway)...
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-5-moments-from-trumps-address-joint-session-congress
And these are more specific key policy details from Trump’s remarks…
The address made history in several ways. First, it was a rare occasion in which a President used a scheduled speech to make news. Trump revealed that the planner of the attack that killed 13 US service members and injured about 170 Afghans during the botched Afghanistan pullout had been arrested and was being flown to the US to face justice. He also confirmed an earlier report that Ukrainian President Zelenskyy had undergone an attitude adjustment and was now ready to sign the mineral deal and work with Trump to negotiate an end to the Russia-Ukraine war.
The speech was also officially the longest Presidential address to a joint session of Congress ever, clocking in at around two hours. And unofficially, some Trump supporters called it the best speech a President has ever given to Congress, as well as the funniest…while Democrats set multiple records for the most embarrassing, juvenile and politically suicidal behavior of any party in history.
It started with Rep. Al Green (a disgrace to that hallowed name) trying to disrupt the speech by ranting like Grandpa Simpson. Speaker Johnson warned the members that decorum rules would be enforced, and when Green refused to pipe down, Johnson had him ejected by the Sergeant at Arms. Later, he tried to play the victim to the media, which attempted to paint it as racism that a black man was silenced. No, a disrespectful loudmouth was thrown out, which polls later showed the vast majority of Americans agreed with.
New Mexico Rep. Melanie Stansbury held up a sign behind Trump as he entered, reading, “This is not normal.” Putting aside the fact that Democrats hate normal people so much, they’ve practically made “normal” a curse word, she was correct: it’s not normal to have a Congress that’s half-filled with people who refuse to accept election results and don’t even know how to behave in public. Texas Rep. Lance Gooden actually did Stansbury a favor by ripping the sign out of her hand and sending it flying.
Later, Sen. Ted Cruz told Sean Hannity that he hated many of Obama and Biden’s policies, but he stood and applauded when they visited Congress because adults show respect for the Office of the President.
The Democrats who did show up sat like lumps through the entire speech, refusing to applaud or stand up for anything, no matter how nonpartisan, moving or good for America. Many brought little signs saying odd things like “False” (which they held up even when Trump was saying indisputably true things) or “Musk steals” (as the world’s richest man, he really needs to steal your grandma’s Social Security check.)
Nobody told them that photoshopping signs is the easiest trick in the book. Before the speech was half over, social media was overflowing with doctored photos of them holding signs that had been altered to say more appropriate things, like “I’m retarded.” How did they NOT see that coming? It was as predictable as Bugs Bunny holding up a sign by Elmer Fudd with a screw and a ball on it.
The Democrats’ behavior was so self-defeating, you’d think their political advisors were…well, us. It was if they were determined to convince as many viewers as possible that they are nasty, childish, loud-mouthed, unreasonable twits with no intelligent ideas and who have no more business in any responsible adult job than a spoiled four-year-old pitching a fit in the Walmart candy aisle.
Trump talked about common sense issues backed by up to 80% of Americans, like border security, deporting illegal alien criminals, keeping men out of women’s sports, reducing inflation and ending war in Ukraine. He also welcomed numerous guests who were either everyday heroes or tragic victims of bad policies. The Democrats sat on their hands and glowered through it all. They showed America that they refuse to applaud not just for border security or cutting government waste, but also for the mothers of Laken Riley and Joycelyn Nungaray, two young women murdered by illegal aliens; an American rescued from a Russian prison and his 95-year-old mother; a man who adopted 40 foster children; and the son of a slain police officer whom Trump announced had been accepted to West Point.
Early on, Trump said he knew the Democrats wouldn’t applaud him even if he cured a deadly disease. They just about proved him right when he introduced 13-year-old DJ Daniel, who beat a terminal brain cancer diagnosis and who dreams of becoming a police officer. Trump announced that he was being named an honorary Secret Service agent, sparking a huge standing ovation – from half of Congress, at least.
Normally, as that overwhelmed child accepted his badge, we’d say there wasn’t a dry eye in the House. But the Democrats kept their seats, stilled their hands and just glared dry-eyed like Blue Meanies through it all. Some media outlets didn’t show the audience, but video confirmed that they remained seated. It was absolutely appalling. Partisan hatred has rotted their souls away. If this is their plan to get reelected, they may wander in the desert longer than Moses.
(Sidenote: Nicole Wallace of MSNBC must’ve seen the massive negative reaction to the Dems sitting through the tribute to little DJ and thought, “Hold muh beer! I can come up with something even more offensive than that!” As one commenter said, it “might be the most odious thing I’ve ever heard on cable news.” And we’re talking about MSNBC!)
Lest you think we’re being partisan in describing the reactions to the speech, we’ve got the polls to back it up. Even such non-Trump-friendly outlets as CBS and CNN found overwhelming approval (from 69 to 76 percent) for Trump’s speech and a similarly low level of approval for the Democrats’ surly divisiveness. Large majorities (two-thirds to three-quarters) thought Trump had a clear plan for dealing with inflation and liked his plans for dealing with immigration, the border and wasteful government spending.
Most viewers said the speech made them feel “hopeful” and “proud,” and described it in terms such as “presidential,” “inspiring,” “unifying” and “entertaining.” EyesOver, which uses AI to track sentiments on the Internet, showed a 3% bump in support for Trump and a drop in support for Democrats.
https://redstate.com/nick-arama/2025/03/05/polling-on-trumps-joint-address-n2186289
But cheer up, Democrats. You’ll always have MSNBC and CNN to call Trump’s speech “angry” and “divisive,” even when it wasn’t. And “The View” will be on again today. Maybe they’ll call him “Hitler” again. That’s working out great for you, as Kurt Schlichter explains in his inimitable way…
Another act of hypocritical self-immolation by the Democrats at Trump’s speech was having all the female members wear pink to show their “support of women.” This came just 24 hours after ALL of them, along with their male colleagues, voted to block a bill to stop delusional males from taking over women’s sports, invading their locker rooms and maiming them on the field.
They weren’t even moved to stand in honor of Laken Riley, Joycelyn Nungaray or Payton McNabb, the guest who suffered paralysis and an end to her student athletic dreams after a “trans” volleyball player spiked the ball so hard in her face that it caused brain damage. With “supporters” like them, who needs enemies?
Tennis legend Martina Navratilova had a blunt message for Democrats who posture as feminists but are too scared of the trans lobby to vote to protect women: “Grow a spine.”
Hard act to follow
Michigan freshman Senator Elissa Slotkin had the unenviable task of following Trump with the Democratic response (we already knew their response; it got one of them thrown out.) She tried to keep it civil, but no Democrat can talk about Trump for long without going off the rails, and when she did, the train wreck was a doozy.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2025/03/05/democrat-response-n2653283
Hot mic
Before Trump’s speech, VP J.D. Vance and Speaker Mike Johnson were caught in this private exchange:
Vance: “By the way, I think the speech is going to be great, but I don’t know how you do this for 90 minutes.”
Johnson: “The hardest thing was doing it during Biden when the speech was a stupid campaign speech.”
https://www.westernjournal.com/jd-vance-mike-johnson-caught-talking-hot-mic-trumps-address-congress/
That might have been embarrassing if a hundred million Americans who were about to watch the speech weren’t thinking the exact same thing.
HELP HUCK PAC ELECT REPUBLICANS:
$2,007,550 given to 323 candidates. DONATE $5 HERE to keep it going.
UPDATE on Hampton Dellinger case; can Trump hire and fire in his own Executive Branch or not?
Naturally, the big story today is the spectacular performance last night of President Trump during his speech to the joint session of Congress. It was phenomenal, history in the making. We’re so proud to support him. (And, of course, it was delightful to watch the Democrats utterly humiliating themselves, as detailed elsewhere in the newsletter. At this point, we can only assume that, yes, they really are that stupid.)
But one thing Trump didn’t talk about, likely because it’s in litigation, is his ability, as head of the Executive Branch, to actually run that part of the government, with the authority to hire and fire at will. Yesterday, we brought you the story of Biden appointee (and longtime, highly partisan Biden family friend and business associate) Hampton Dellinger, head of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) until Trump fired him soon after taking office. Dellinger sued to be reinstated, and DC District Judge Amy Berman Jackson so ordered. The White House has appealed, of course, and this case will almost certainly end up before the Supreme Court, as is no doubt their strategy.
In our story yesterday, we noted that Dellinger had said he was helping some “probationary” employees who had also been terminated but wanted to keep their jobs. An OSC press release from last Friday referring to six such employees also said that “Dellinger is considering ways to seek relief for a broader group without the need for individual filings with OSC.” Sure enough, it turns out he’s working on behalf of over 5,000 such employees (!), from the Department of Agriculture alone, that he’s trying to get reinstated. (Not having to file 5,000 cases individually WOULD save him a lot of work.) Dellinger argues that these employees cannot be fired “without individualized cause.”
https://osc.gov/News/Pages/25-22-Stay-Request-Probationary-Employees.aspx
How is Trump supposed to reduce the size of the branch of government he oversees if he can’t fire people?
POLITICO refers to the (temporarily) reinstated Dellinger as “a political watchdog for government workers,” which seems like a stretch but apparently is how he now identifies. And here’s the twist; from their report: “Dellinger’s petition on behalf of the fired USDA workers is now before another bureaucrat whom Trump is trying to remove from office: Cathy Harris, who heads a government board on workplace grievances.” That would be the three-member Merit Systems Protection Board.
That’s right, the case of these 5,000 employees whom Trump is trying to remove from their jobs is being heard by another official, a Democrat, whom Trump tried to remove from HER job. Not kidding. Think perhaps she might recuse herself from that case? No? And how DOES one recuse oneself from a three-member board? What if the other two members need somebody to break a tie? Somebody has to think about these things.
If she fails to recuse herself from such cases, it seems to us that that alone might serve as “cause” for her to be removed from the board. With her own job on the line, she comes to these cases with a tremendous conflict of interest.
Unsurprisingly, late Tuesday evening, the Merit Systems Protection Board ordered a 45-day stay on the firing of those first six employees.
Also on Tuesday, Harris, who had been terminated by Trump on February 10, was granted a permanent injunction that reinstated her as the Biden-appointed chairman of the Merit Systems Protection Board. She’s baaa-aaack!
The judge who reinstated her is DC District Judge Randolph Contreras, appointed by President Obama in March 2012. “The President’s attempt to terminate Harris was unlawful,” Contreras wrote. As the WASHINGTON EXAMINER reports, Judge Contreras said that without documented evidence from Trump to justify her firing, “Harris retains all authority and benefits associated with her role while preventing the administration from installing a replacement.”
Of course, ABC NEWS latched on in their headline to the judge’s ruling that Trump’s firing of Harris was “unlawful.” Other than that, their report is pretty straightforward, at least for what they do say. There’s a lot they don’t say, however.
By the way, if the name “Judge Contreras” is familiar to you, it’s probably because he oversaw numerous January 6 cases. And if you want to know his mindset, this NBC NEWS report from about a year ago says the judge “expressed concern during [defendant Jeffrey Sabol’s] sentencing hearing...that the former president could trigger another violent attack in the lead-up to or aftermath of the 2024 presidential election.” Does that give you a hint of his anti-Trump bias?
At the risk of sounding like Paul Harvey, “the rest of the story,” or at least part of it, is included by THE RIGHT SCOOP. “Even if [Cathy Harris] was confirmed by the Senate,” they say, “she is still a political appointee and all of them serve at the President’s behest.” The Supreme Court has got to settle this, and, as we said yesterday, the Trump administration has been maneuvering to get the issue before them.
As FOX NEWS reports, Harris’ attorneys, in appealing her firing, cited SCOTUS’ 1935 ruling in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States that limited a President’s ability to fire certain agency heads. But some on the Court, they say, have “signaled a willingness to rein in or perhaps overturn that ruling.” Seems like the time is right.
THE RIGHT SCOOP put it in less lawyerly fashion, but White House attorneys express a similar strategy in court documents: “The American people elected President Trump to run the executive branch. And President Trump has determined that keeping [Harris] in office no longer serves the interest of the American people. That democratically accountable choice should be respected.”
Yes, we ARE going to find out about Seth Rich’s death
If you thought we’d forgotten about the mystery surrounding DNC staffer Seth Rich’s murder on a Washington DC street in 2016 (shortly before Wikileaks posted DNC emails allegedly “hacked by the Russians”), be assured we’ve only been playing the waiting game. And now, it’s just been revealed that the FBI wants us all to wait longer.
Attorney Ty Clevenger, the hero who for years has been doing the heavy lifting trying to pry information on this case out of the FBI’s hot hands, says they’re still not complying with his Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request from February of last year.
Instead of releasing the documents, as he had been advised would happen on March 10, the FBI now says they’ll be providing only what’s known as a “Vaughn Report,” which lists the files withheld and the reasons for their concealment.
“Reasons.”
As Jim Hoft at THE GATEWAY PUNDIT points out, their refusal follows the same old pattern. For years, they denied even having Rich’s laptop, but then they were legally forced to own up. Even then, they refused to release any metadata from any of his electronic devices. Clevenger also found evidence that the FBI improperly withheld pages from CrowdStrike’s report on the alleged 2016 hack of the DNC computers. (Recall, CrowdStrike admitted under oath that they never had evidence of a Russian hack.)
We are over the target, folks. There has to be much more to this story, because if it were just a regular botched robbery/homicide case, the FBI would not have treated it with such secretiveness for so long. As Clevenger posted Monday on X: “...Kash Patel and Pam Bondi will learn about this, and I suspect some heads will roll. That’s long overdue, because the FOIA office at FBI is systemically corrupt. The bureaucrats can run, but they can’t hide.” It will take a little more patience, though; Clevenger regrets that he has to play “the long game.”
Our guess is that Patel and Bondi are already fully aware of this case, and that we WILL find out the story, not just what happened to Seth Rich but also the huge tapestry of obfuscation that hides what we’re not supposed to know. Let the chips fall. Clevenger’s full statement is here…
Thank you for reading our newsletter.
Most concise, accurate and honest newsletter of any media outlets. Never will I ever read any LSM snippets again. TY Gov Huckabee for this newsletter. My sole source for the real clear facts. BTW, Laura is a gifted writer and I enjoy her thoughts. MAGA
While I am bouyed by Trumps initial success we must remember our enemy never gives up. The left is demonically possessed and led and their behavior shows us they will lie ( their greatest weapon) cheat and steal given any opportunity. Trump is the answer to much prayer and that needs to continue as the attacks will only intensify on him and those around him. What is still most disappointing to me is the refusal of intelligent Americans to still support the Democratic Party given what we have witnessed in the last 40 some days.