On Monday’s Mark Levin Show, The Constitution was systematically targeted and attacked by those in the Democrat party who embrace the 1619 project. The radical extreme left hates the Constitution and wants to eviscerate it because it prevents the grandiosity and power they seek. If America has a Democrat party that has circumvented Article 2 Sec 2 of the constitution, should those electors’ votes be counted even though they’re tainted because those states chose to not comply with the federal Constitution? Of course not, because willfully and brazenly changing election laws outside of the federal Constitution violates the Constitutional election process in that state. Then, no member of Congress may be sworn in without taking an oath to defend the Constitution. Therefore, it is understood that the votes counted must be obtained Constitutionally. “Shall” count does not mean that Congress is compelled to count votes that were cast extra-constitutionally. Later, five nerds at The Wall Street Journal editorial board just normalized and conflated the spying on the Trump campaign with the fraud being legitimately challenged in Congress. Afterward, Sen. Ted Cruz joins the show to reiterate why the Constitution outlines how a Constitutional challenge should be conducted by the Vice President and Congress.
THIS IS FROM:
Wall St Journal
The Election Rejectionists
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Image used with permission of Getty Images
Rough transcript of Hour 1
Hour 1 Segment 1
Welcome, America. Missed you very much. We’ve been keeping busy on parler and on Twitter. You know, we no longer post on Facebook. I’ve had a lot of discussions. I’ve had senators calling me, congressmen calling me. I’ve gone to battle with several of them. And I’ve really been chomping at the bit to talk to you directly. You’re hearing conservatives and pseudo conservatives the. The bizarre editorial pages, including at The Wall Street Journal, which trashed the Tea Party 10 years ago, which basically is a mouthpiece for McConnell. You’ve heard people who defend the Constitution being attacked by the likes of Ben Sasse and Adam Kinzinger. Viciously attacked with utter and complete fiction and poison. Let me tell you from my perspective, here’s the problem. From my perspective, without counting even one fraudulent vote. Our precious constitution. Was targeted. And systematically attacked. By a Democrat party that embraces the 16 19 project antifa Black Lives Matter and detests our Constitution. This is the history of the Democrat Party. Going back to before the Confederacy, including the Confederacy and slavery, segregation, and now today with the neo Marxists and these so-called democratic socialists. You see, for the Democrat Party, which has now been hijacked. By the radical extreme left, the Constitution is a problem. It’s not to be revered. It’s to be eviscerated. Which is exactly why Chuck Schumer has said. That should they win these two seats in Georgia tomorrow. 50/50 Senate with Kamala Harris, they argue, as the president of the Senate. They will have a 51 to 50 majority to push through whatever they want as they eliminate the filibuster rule, destroy the courts and separation of power and a bunch of other things. Because they hate the Constitution. The Constitution places a severe limit on the kind of power and grandiosity that the Democrat Party wishes to exercise. It wishes to destroy and control the private sector. And it wishes to destroy and control our constitutional republic. These are the facts. This is the background. The question is this. If you have a Democrat Party. That unleashes legal. And lobbing attacks prior to the election. Throughout the country, but specifically on battleground states. Will the Republicans control both houses of the legislature and therefore Republicans through the legislature controls the electoral process in that state and ultimately the selection of electors that ought to be counted on on January 6th, two days from now, and a joint session of Congress? If you’re a Democrat. If you’re a Biden supporter, if you’re a leftist, you have to figure out how to get around Article two, Section one, clause two of the Constitution. It doesn’t take a genius. It takes corruption. Pennsylvania, that’s exactly what took place. The Republicans control the legislature and the legislature is supposed to direct how electors are chosen. Each state shall appoint in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct. A number of electors equal to the whole number of senators and representatives to which the state may be entitled in Congress. If that’s not complied with. If it’s not the state legislature. That directs how electors are to be chosen. But a secretary of state. But a governor, but an attorney general. But an elected majority on the Supreme Court of the state. Or even a federal judge. If entities, public officials, institutions other than the state legislature is directing the manner in which electors are to be chosen, elections are to be held. They have poisoned. Right out of the gate. Poison. The constitutionally elected process within that state. You with me, Mr. Producer? You’re with me, America. So at the front end of Article two. The electoral process instituted in that given state. Violates the federal constitution, it is unconstitutional. I don’t care how many people voted. That’s of no consequence. That’s not relevant. We’re not a parliamentary system, we don’t directly elect anybody but members of the House of Representatives. And so when a state conducts itself that way. Are there there’d be no consequences. So the electors that that state. Certifies through the executive branch, not the legislative branch, the Democrats that control in most of those states the executive branch and send those to the archivist to be held and then sent to the vice president and to the joint session of Congress on January 6th. Are those electors to be counted? And to have an effect on the selection of the president, the vice president of the United States, even though at the front end of that constitutional provision, the front end. Those states did not comply. Did not comply with the Constitution openly. And brazenly broke the law. You will be amazed. At the legal mental midgets who write me arguments about how that could be wrong and so forth, I don’t even respond to them. I don’t even respond to them. Well, the Supreme Court doesn’t matter what any court said. You’re the court read the language. You don’t have to have a single fraudulent vote, a single fraudulent ballot to conclude. That the election in that state. Violated and intentionally violated the United States Constitution. That’s exactly what the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania intended. That’s exactly what the governor and the secretary of state of Pennsylvania intended. And it’s not just their. They eliminated signature requirements, they eliminated postal stamp date requirements, they extended the days of voting change the time of voting and on and on and on, the legislature never did that. Michigan. A Republican legislature, the Democrat secretary of state, unilaterally changed the state’s laws with respect to absentee ballot applications and signature verification. She just sent unsolicited seven million ballots. To the voter lists. And direct and intentional circumvention of the state legislature and state law. The election in Michigan that took place as a result of a Democrat secretary of state. What’s unconstitutional? In Wisconsin. The Elections Commission. And local Democrat officials in the state’s largest cities, the Democrat cities, Milwaukee and Madison, at the top change the state’s election laws. They placed hundreds of unmanned drop boxes in strategic locations. In violation of state law, the locations were intended to be convenient to the Democrats. They told would be voters how to avoid security measures like signature verification and photo ID requirements. Tell me how many news organizations have reported this to you? None. So they bypassed the Republican state legislature. The Democrats. The voting in Wisconsin as a result of what took place there, the selection of electors is unconstitutional. Right, Tom McClintock. Unconstitutional. In Georgia. You have a Republican secretary of state who just taped a phone call with the president of United States and they leaked it to the media and of course, the media for the most part, don’t put the full transcript out. They do. They’re cherry picking. And then, of course, the media say it’s worse than Watergate. Everything’s worse than Watergate. But we don’t care what the media think and say, do we? They are corrupt through it, through enemy of the people. So in Georgia, this reprobate secretary of state. Now, March six, twenty, twenty. There’s this lawsuit, the Democrat Party, Georgia versus Raffensperger. So he enters into a settlement. Which results in a consent decree. Making it far more difficult to challenge defective signatures beyond the 20 to express mandatory procedures set forth in Georgia state law as determined by the state legislature. Among other things, before a ballot can be rejected, the settlement required a registrar who found a defective signature to now seek a review by two other registrars and only if a majority of the registrars agreed that the signature was defective. Could the ballot be rejected, but not before all three registrars. In other words, it goes on and on and on. They made it virtually impossible to reject a vote. Now you know why. The mail in an absentee ballot, rejection rates across the country, we’re now almost non-existent. But those laws were changed by a rogue secretary of state buckling to a lawsuit encouraged. By Stacey Abrams, whose sister sits on the bench and is overseeing decisions about voting roles, in which case she rules each and every time for the Democrat Party in this upcoming Senate election. Here’s four battleground states with the Democrats winning with litigation, with the Democrats pressured their statewide executive officials to get around the Republican state legislatures. So those electors who were certified. Had been poisoned. Now, when we come back, what do we do about this? I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 2
Having attacked. Attack the electoral process in key states through litigation, through their governors, through their secretaries of state, their boards of elections, their mayors, and the failure of the United States Supreme Court. To uphold. Article two, Section one of the Constitution, despite the fact it had the opportunity to do so. Now it goes to Congress, now in the Constitution, it says. The president of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the vote shall be counted. Person having the greatest number of votes shall be the president. And then it goes on. I actually heard a conservative member of the House of Representatives on me on this earlier on the Larry O’Connor Show. Say the word is ciao. So Congress has no choice but to count them. You know, you cannot. Take your seat in the House of the Senate of the United States Congress, unless you swear an oath to your country in the Constitution that you will uphold the Constitution of the United States. Is there any other scenario? Well, there’s an election. And individuals or institutions have violated the election procedures. That the person counting the votes, knowing this is required to count those votes. Have you ever heard anything so absurd and irrational and illogical, and then they’ll point, they’ll say the Constitution says shall they shall be counted. The Constitution says this is the way electors are to be chosen. And once they’re chosen that way, it’s a matter of logic, it’s a matter of. A fundamental rationality, and once they’re chosen that way. They shall be counted. That the framers had to say in the Constitution. That they electors have to be chosen constitutionally. Wouldn’t that be a little repetiteur? In order for them to be counted, they just assumed. That in order for them to be counted, shall be counted. That the manner in which the electors were selected and certified in the first place complied with the first part of that provision of the Constitution. So here we are as conservatives and Republicans or constitutionalists of any break dancing on the head of my pet, dancing on the head of a pin while the bastards in the other party have already eviscerated our electoral process. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 3
So now we have in place in these states and others electoral systems that were built not by the state legislatures. But by the Democrats in these various positions. And only the legislature, which has to direct the appointment of electors, is mentioned in the Constitution. This is how the Democrats plan to win office the presidency for sure, forever more. This is how they intend to turn the country into California. And there are Republicans who will go right along with this. They’ll come up with one cockamamie argument after another, they’ll turn the Constitution inside out, so you’re to believe they’re the real constitutionalists and textualists. They have no clue. I don’t know what’s going to happen in Georgia tomorrow, but did you ever think you’d be sitting on the edge of your chair hoping that we win two Republican Senate seats in the state of Georgia? Well, there’s reasons for that, and one of them is the manner in which the elections are being handled by the secretary of state there, which just announced that he’s going to talk with the district attorney and the election board over the legality of his conversation with the president of the United States. Let me point out what I’m talking about, the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal, maybe you’ve seen some of these guys. They have a Fox program on the weekend that really nobody watches. You got Paul Jeggo, who runs the operation there. He’s been running it for decades. And they are corporatists, that’s what they are. They’re not conservatives, they’re not constitutionalists, they favor open borders and on and on they are corporatists. They’ve always been corporatists. It’s called The Wall Street Journal, after all. It’s not called the Main Street Journal. And so they put it under the phrase editorial board, you’ll see this at National Review and other places where they don’t want individuals names attached to it and they believe this will give it more of what the editorial board at The Wall Street Journal. It’s five nerd’s, five geek’s. That’s what it is. That’s their editorial board. The title is The Election Rejectionists, and this is how they do what they do. They sit on their fat asses and Manhattan. And shoot spitballs. At mainstream America, does Americans like to tell the world a hallmark of democracy is the willingness to accept defeat and the peaceful transfer of power? The tragedy of the last two presidential elections has been the refusal of partisans to accept defeat and public trust in American self-government is eroding as a result. So now what they’ve done. In their first two sentences. If they have put on an equal playing field, the Democrats spying dossier, FISA abuses. Felonious leaks unmasking and on and on and on and on now comparing that to you and me and others. Raising Civili legitimately, legally, constitutionally. Issues in this election, that’s how perverse. These nerds at the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal are. And they go on the main issue now is that too many Republicans refuse to accept Mr. Trump’s defeat, more than 100 House members and as of this weekend, at least 12 senators say they will formally object to the editorial electoral college count. This won’t change. The result, though, will delay it as Congress spends up to two hours debating the objections to each state’s results. More corrupt, a precedent and the resulting political damage. You see how they position this, I just told you what took place in at least four states, there’s not a word of that, not a word of that in this editorial, because the geeks are either too stupid. So they think they’re clever. The leading culprit here is Mr. Trump. As always, refuses to accept responsibility for defeat. We call it here. Not a word about the state’s. Recall that he has claimed that Iowa caucus results were stolen in 2016 when he lost to Ted Cruz. He’s now spinning conspiracy theories and election falsehoods daily on Twitter. Have I spun a conspiracy theory, ladies and gentlemen, when I told you what took place in these states? He doesn’t seem to care what damage he does in promoting the myth of his victory. The damage is spreading as Mr. Trump puts pressure on other Republicans to take up his lost cause. Presidents never called me, never pressured me. And so basically The Wall Street Journal thinks that none of these Republicans can think for themselves. None of these Republicans can digest what’s taken place all around them. And, of course, the extent to which the members of the Wall Street Journal, esteemed editorial board have actually gone into these communities and find out what has taken place is zero. Note that the senators in their statement don’t allege specific acts of fraud. A Wall Street Journal editorial page, there are hundreds and hundreds. I have sworn affidavits that allege specific aspects of fraud, if you publish them, have you listed them on your editorial page? You’d have to reduce the font to the point where people would need a magnifying glass to read it. So don’t play games with your readers. They’re smarter than you are. Instead, they cite allegations of fraud and irregularities that feed deep distrust of the results, distrust they and the president are feeding. So now it’s the president’s fault. It’s the fault of these Republican senators. The courts have rejected every Trump campaign attempt to intervene in the state results, often by judges appointed by the president. Let’s stop there. I keep hearing something like 60 cases were brought by the Trump campaign in 60 cases were lost. First of all, the Trump campaign didn’t bring 60 cases. It brought far fewer than 60 cases, but let’s show you what kind of reporting. And sophomoric surface level thinking this is at the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal. Let me talk about one of those cases. One of those cases, a lawsuit was brought challenging. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, as well as the executive side of Pennsylvania, all Democrats, the five members of the seven on the Supreme Court for interfering and undermining exactly what I said. Article two, Section one clause to the Constitution where the state legislature gets to determine how electors are are appointed or chosen. But the Supreme Court took that power away from the state legislature. No signatures, no signature comparisons, no postal dates. If postal dates are smudged, too bad they changed the the time of the election, the final time, the final day. They changed what observers are allowed. In other words, they rewrote the election laws the way they rewrote. The Republican legislature gerrymandering of the of the congressional seats, as a result, the Republicans lost two Republican seats because the Democrats on the Supreme Court elected. Our rogue, their political. Now, that case went to the United States Supreme Court. And it still sits there today that’s considered a loss, Wall Street Journal think that’s a loss. In terms of a civil lawsuit that should never have been brought, a lawsuit that shouldn’t have challenged any, you understand? You understand this is a this is a pathetic editorial that cherrypicks. There’s no serious analysis here. All lawsuits aren’t the same, all petitioners aren’t the same, but they don’t get lost everyone. Actually, they didn’t lose everyone. But even so, what does that say about the judiciary? What does that say about the United States Supreme Court? A lot, and most of it not good. As Republican Senator Pat Toomey, who’s retiring. Has shown the voting evidence from Pennsylvania is that Mr Trump lost fair and square. Why would you cite Pat Toomey for that, Pat Toomey doesn’t have any idea what took place. He wasn’t involved in any of this litigation. Why don’t you point out some of the people who were involved in this litigation or some of the House members, Republicans in Pennsylvania? Some of the elected state delegates and state senators who’ve made comments quite contrary to Pat Toomey, but you wouldn’t know that based on this editorial. Mr. Trump’s narrow loss was personal as voters decided they didn’t want four more years of his raucous governance, is that what happened? No, they’re projecting over there at The Wall Street Journal because they’re corporatists, they don’t like the things that Trump has done. They’re corporatists. And they think that Biden. Well, they can do business with bad. Just the George W. Bush said he could do business or maybe it was Thatcher, but Putin. The Electoral College gambit won’t work this week because House Democrats won’t go along, but imagine if Republicans ran the House and did 81 million Americans who voted for Mr. Biden would be disenfranchised by an insiders scheme. The political response will be volcanic and understandably so. Republicans would be crushed in the 2022 midterms. Imagine. The unconstitutional changes that have taken place carry forward as the baseline for 2022 and especially 2024. How difficult will it be to elect a Republican president of the United States? Donald Trump got. 12 million more votes this time around the last time. So apparently some people do like his raucous governance, quote unquote. In our view, this week’s exercise is also unconstitutional. So we have constitutional scholars, experts on The Wall Street Journal editorial board. They’re no more expert at interpreting the Constitution than they are expert. And interpreting prognosis from a proctologist. They’re not expert in anything, the text of the original charter elaborated by the Fourth Amendment gives state legislatures the power to appoint electors. The vice president is charged to open the votes to be counted, nothing more. Isn’t it amazing? The very provision they paraphrase. Is actually the Article two, Section one clause, too, that we’ve talked about, not the 12th Amendment, but in this respect, that part of the Constitution. And they drive right by the driver’s. And the only power the Congress has. Is the count. Unconstitutional elector votes, according to The Wall Street Journal. They just had to count on that’s it. You have to ask yourself. With a framer’s and those who soon followed after them so stupid that they would give the huge power. To Congress and only Congress could count votes, why would they give that to the archivist of the United States? The Electoral Count Act of 1887, which the House and Senate will act upon, is unconstitutional, giving Congress the ability to second guess those state decisions. These guys are such narcissists and egomaniacs, they’ve now determined they talk about Trump, but listen to these guys and stretching this law for partisan exercise. Republicans are also giving Democrats more ammunition to use in their campaign to overturn the Electoral College in favor of a direct popular vote. And it goes on. Apparently, the clowns who are on the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal have not heard what Chuck Schumer says. They don’t need any instigation, provocation, encouragement to destroy our Constitution. Perhaps they’ve heard of the 1619 project, perhaps they’ve seen Black Lives Matter, which is embraced by the Democrats and attacks our founding. Perhaps they saw the attacks on our monuments. Perhaps they’re aware of what’s going on in our colleges and universities. And perhaps they’re aware that Chuck Schumer has announced that if they win those Georgia seats, they intend to destroy the judiciary, the independence and separation of powers of those two branches. They intend to destroy the United States Senate by packing it with more Democrats. They intend to ram through every radical neo Marxist piece of legislation they possibly can by eliminating the filibuster. And they intend to destroy the Electoral College, which they have done in this election cycle. And The Wall Street Journal is worried about us, you and me. Encouraging them to do it. Maybe it’s time for new editorial board over there at The Wall Street Journal because this one. Is so out of touch. And as a collective IQ of negative nine. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 4
I want to remind you of this Wall Street Journal, the corporatists Polje go his merry gang of buffoons back on July 27, 2011. They were at war with the Tea Party. Why? Because McConnell and Boehner were at war with the Tea Party. And this corporatist rag is a mouthpiece. For McConnell. Boehner and, of course, Paul Ryan, and the headline was Tea Party hobbits need to go back to Middle Earth. Remember that none of these critics have is an alternative strategy for achieving anything nearly as fiscally or politically beneficial as Mr. Boehner’s plan. The idea seems to be that the House GOP refuses to raise the debt ceiling. A default crisis or gradual government shutdown will ensue. The public will turn en masse against Barack Obama. The Republican House that failed to raise the debt ceiling would somehow escape all the blame. Then Democrats would have no choice but to pass a balanced budget amendment and reform entitlements and so forth. This is the kind of crack political thinking that turned Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell into GOP Senate nominees. The reality is that the debt limit will be raised one way or another in. The only issue now is how much fiscal reform and what political fallout. So they’re defending John McCain, defending Daynard, defending essentially Paul Ryan, defending McConnell, you see. Whenever the Patriots are out there trying to save the Constitution and save even our economic system. The Wall Street Journal, which pretends to be a rational voice, shoots them in the back and they’re not the only ones. So they trashed the Tea Party, they trashed the Trump movement. They trash efforts to defend the Constitution and the electoral system in these various states. And now if we lose Georgia, they will blame you and me, if we lose Georgia, it’ll be because the Republicans have failed to stand up to what is taking place in this country via the Democrat Party and all these institutions that they control. I’ve got other information here. I also want to encourage you to back these entrepreneurs who are really trying to break these this oligopoly, in some cases monopoly when it comes to social media. You can now find us on Rumball, obviously on parler. And we’re going to continue to look for other platforms that I wish to put this program on and hopefully draw your attention and support. I don’t own anything. I’m not involved in all that. And that wouldn’t be a problem even if I were. Put your money where your mouth is, Mark. I got no problem with that. But these are excellent sites.