On Wednesday’s Mark Levin Show, Rep Liz Cheney is a problem because she is throwing in with democrats and the media with her hate for Donald Trump. She threw in with the mob to try and overthrow Trump even before January 6th, and has no proof whatsoever that Trump instigated a riot. She is one of many Republicans to play into the leftist narrative that January 6th was an armed insurrection led by a sitting president, a complete lie. It’s Trump that has been the victim since before his presidency with one hoax after another. Facebook embraces the support from weak Republicans like Cheney, Mitt Romney, and Adam Kinzinger, and is using it to uphold their ban of Trump from the platform. Facebook and Twitter act like a government within a government, an oligopoly that threatens our right to free speech, and continue to abuse their government immunity and make it impossible to sue them. Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg became billionaires by selling our data, and used that money to influence the 2020 election. Democrats aren’t praising Liz Cheney because they like her; she’s just enabling their Marxist takeover. If we as Americans don’t take steps to preserve our country and our culture, it’s not going to happen. Also, Federal judge and Obama appointee Amy Berman Jackson that has targeted Trump officials like Paul Manafort and Roger Stone, and is now going after Attorney General Bill Barr and how he reached his decision to not charge President Trump. Everything about Jackson and her rogue courtroom is a disgrace. We have prosecutorial abuse of Trump and everyone around him, and Amy Berman Jackson is just the latest judge to continue the attack. We’ve already seen how Judge Emmitt Sullivan treated Michael Flynn, and they should all be disbarred for it.
THIS IS FROM:
Axios
PBS NewsHour’s Yamiche Alcindor to anchor “Washington Week”
Washington Post
Opinion: Liz Cheney: The GOP is at a turning point. History is watching us.
Politico
Facebook oversight board was divided over how to weigh Trump decision, official says
Newsbusters
STUDY: PolitiFact’s 8 Times as Likely to Defend Biden Than Check His Facts
CNN
Secret William Barr memo saying not to charge Trump must be released, judge says
Breitbart
Democrats Blamed After U.S. Steel Cancels $1.5B Project in Pennsylvania
Science Alert
The Amazon May Now Actually Be Making Climate Change Worse, Scientists Warn
Fortune
‘Pure panic’: Lumber prices up a staggering 280% as builders scramble for supply
Yahoo Finance
Warren Buffett is right, inflation is running rampant
Bloomberg
What Top Wealth Advisers Are Warning Their Rich Clients About
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Image used with permission of Getty Images / Tom Williams
Rough transcript of Hour 1
Hour 1 Segment 1
With a rogue federal judge in Washington, D.C., who has targeted Trump administration officials from Roger Stone. Paul Manafort. Who’s now on the warpath against Bill Barr and has, in my view, issued a ruling that is utterly contemptible and I will get to her soon, an Obama appointee, no less. Judge Amy Berman Jackson. A disgrace to the road that she wears, and if this republic were functioning properly, she’d be impeached and removed from office. She’s a left wing political hack. Despite what John Roberts, Hollywood, John, has to say about Obama appointees, the vast majority of them are all the same. But she’s in a very powerful position in Washington, D.C., and she is an utter and complete disgrace. And as I say, I’ll get back to her. And there’s other things that are there to burning, I mean. Public broadcasting system, why do we even have a public broadcasting system anymore? With more communication platforms and you can shake a stick at. Why do you have a public that is government broadcasting system or a National Public Radio National Government Radio so they can pick somebody like Yamaichi Alcindor to anchor Washington Week? She is a left wing, unhinged, insane leftist. Another disgrace. As one institution after another falls. And Liz Cheney. She has her backers in the Wall Street Journal editorial page policy go is a joke. Anybody know anything profound apology goes ever written Big Open Borders guy? National Review’s all worked up about Liz Cheney, of course they are. Never trump us to the end. We’ll get to that to. But before I do, the reason Lynne Cheney is a problem. It’s not because she’s upholding the Constitution, she’s not upholding anything her hate for Donald Trump goes to their differences on foreign policy. You can have differences on foreign policy, but you don’t throw in with the mob. In order to undermine a sitting president and she did it even before January six. And she doesn’t have a scintilla of evidence of any kind that Donald Trump incited anything, let alone an insurrection she throws in with the propaganda, with the left wing Marxist in the media and elsewhere. That’s the problem. That’s the problem all of a sudden, Nancy Pelosi is her friend and defends her, Nancy Pelosi hated her father. You look at these Republicans, they’re not loyal to the Constitution, they’re loyal to their own self-righteousness and self aggrandizement. Look at McConnell. McConnell asked Trump the campaign for him, which he does, gives the endorsement. It was a neck and neck race. And he gets the biggest majorities ever had, his wife is appointed secretary of transportation. That didn’t happen on a lark. That wasn’t a coincidence. And on the way out, she stabs the president in the back and then McConnell stabs the president in the front. President Trump gives a full pardon to Scooter Libby. President George W. Bush refused to do it. He gave them a mishmash. This was Dick Cheney’s right hand man. He’s a good man, Scooter Libby, and what was done to Scooter Libby was outrageous. But George W. Bush didn’t have the guts to do what Donald Trump did. And pardoned fully. Scooter Libby, who Trumpton even now. Really quite shocking. So they play into the narrative of the left of the media. Who now champion Mitt Romney, who they hated, who now champion Liz Cheney, they hate the Cheney’s, but not for these purposes. Why is all this relevant, Facebook? The narrative, you see that Donald Trump was responsible for January six and the January six was an armed insurrection incited by a sitting president that challenged the very constitutional system of this country, that almost brought it down to its knees is a lie. We know what it was, we saw it with our own eyes. We don’t support it, we don’t give it any kind of fluff, but on the other hand. We’re not going to join in with the kooks either. Who use events like that to attack you and me. It’s Donald Trump who’s been the victim throughout, I don’t remember Liz Cheney coming to his defense when the FBI and the intelligence agencies, when the FISA court, when law firms in Washington, D.C.. When the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC all conspired to take them out. Broke numerous federal laws. I don’t give a damn who’s been charged or not, they did. Smeared them one year after another, after another after another, Russia collusion leaks, criminal leaks out of the FBI and other entities. And Liz, by the way. Two unconstitutional impeachments, and she participated in the second. Coup attempt after coup attempt, criminal investigation, subpoenas, documents, witnesses, leaks, lies. That’s why we don’t have a stomach for Liz Cheney or Mitt Romney or Adam Kinzinger or The Wall Street Journal editorial page and the clown that runs at Polje Go. And then, of course, Facebook embraces all of this. This is from Politico, a left wing site, a minority, the members of Facebook’s oversight board oversight board. Filled with a bunch of Lib’s. Push to take a broader look at whether former President Donald Trump’s posts contributed to racial tension and broke rules on incitement of violence but couldn’t reach a consensus, a representative for the board told Politico on Wednesday. So the entire ideology of the left is based on racism, gender, ism, division, tribalism. And it’s Donald Trump, you see. They want to see if he contributed to racial tension. He broke rules and the incitement to violence, really Democrat after Democrat, either supporting or silent in the face of violent. Looting, arson, murder, brutality against the police. Not one of them has been banned from Twitter. Now, one of them has been banned from Facebook. The split suggests some board members may have been open to taking even stronger action against Trump’s account than the continued suspension that the panel would be wound up endorsing. This Facebook, like Twitter and the rest, think they are a government within a government. And if you believe in free market capitalism, if you believe in competition, if you embrace Hayek and Macy’s and Friedman. And Haslet. And Smith, if you embrace that, great. When it comes to free market capitalism. You have to agree, I would think. That this oligopoly. Is a greater threat to our economic system because it’s literally threatening our unalienable rights, including free speech. And in part, it’s due to the fact that they got protection from the federal government in 1995. Well, you can’t sue them. Well, let him join the rest of us where we can be sued, saying we’re big media, big media. Our big media are ideological. They don’t give a damn about what they say or what you think because they’ve been immunized for the last half century or so by the United States Supreme Court that wrote it into the Constitution. It’s not even their. That’s not even there all the way up to the mid 60s, you could sue a newspaper. Or television or modern times or radio. He could sue. Certainly in state court. But they eliminated that by making the bar so high, it’s basically impossible. It’s cost prohibitive and it’s really impossible to get the result that you want nearly. If you’re a public figure and they have taken the term public figure and they broaden it to such an extent that you can be a private citizen walking down a street if something happens and you sue the newspaper, but your name now becomes very, very big and very, very famous, all of a sudden you’re a public figure. You can see the circular logic there, but that’s what’s in the law. So big tech comes in. These guys want to be protected, so they know we’re going to have these community platforms. Community, there’s no talk about oversight boards or third party reviews or anything, Anana, we’re going to have open platforms, but we can’t really get out of the starting gate if we’re not protect our kids. You want to get paid well, protect your Internets fairly. Know what protection. They steal your data. They sell your data, they trade your data, they track your data, they track you, they become multibillionaires, they’re protected. And now. They’ve influenced our elections. There’s no question Google has influenced our elections. There’s no question Twitter influenced our elections by covering up that Biden story. There’s no question Facebook influenced our election with 400 million dollars coming out of Zuckerberg pocket to get out the vote in Democrat strongholds. There’s no question that these punks. Who do not believe in capitalism, who did not grow their companies through free market competition, that these punks. Can now ban a former president of the United States by repeating what Liz Cheney has to say. And others in the Democrat Party and media and at National Review in The Wall Street Journal. And they’re perfectly happy with it. No, Liz, this isn’t about you defending the Constitution. This is about you and your self-righteous demands that a president bow to your foreign policy. And to be honest, I’m much more of a hawk than a lot of people, I’m not an interventionist. He must be a neocon. That’s what the antisemite clowns like to say in and out of the Republican Party. Now, there’s more than that, but that’s beside the point. The Facebook oversight board. It’s like. These third party fact checkers. The Indispensible Media Research Center. Tim Graham. News busters, dog study PolitiFact eight times as likely to defend Joe Biden than check his facts. When we come back, I will tell you about this fact checker who I’ve had to engage in battle with just hours. I’ve had to engage in battle with Facebook. Facebook never suspended me or banned me, ladies and gentlemen. What did it its shadow? What do you call it, which they shadow banned me from time to time, or they give me a scarlet letter. And I said, you know what? I’m not in third grade. I’m not inciting a damn thing. I don’t know who’s making these decisions, but they can go F themselves. So I’m leaving. And then I spent about 45. Five days telling you I’m leaving, so you would come and say with Twitter, when Twitter went after the president of the United States, Donald Trump, I decided I’m leaving them to. And then five over five million of you follow me over to parler. It’s not the easiest place to be. It’s not the easiest place to to work through. But we can do it and we have done it. And of course, after I made that announcement, Facebook and Twitter, I believe, were concerned about more and more hosts doing it, unfortunately, more and more did not. And so they tried to destroy, parler what parlor’s back, they’ve tried to destroy Donald Trump. Donald Trump is back. But it’s now our turn to crush them rather than playing defense. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 2
So we have these groups out there that self characterize, if you will, themselves as independent third parties, we see this done among the Marxist left all the time to confound people. And so there’s a group that calls itself political fact. A political fact was given birth by a very left wing publisher. And our friends at News Busters dot com, right, Tim Grand political fact, insist they’re nonpartisan fact checkers, that they don’t take sides with any politician or party. That’s the claim of the editor, Angie Drobnick Holan. We’re independent. We work hard to find the truth. So we follow the facts wherever they take us, regardless who made the claim. Well, that is a lie. It’s been a lie. My own experience as well. A new study by the Media Research Center finds that four years ago, PolitiFact offered 52 fact checks with a truth o meter. During the administration of Donald Trump in his first 100 days, while in the same period this year, PolitiFact offered just 13 fact checks of president by. That’s 52 to 13 since the median says Trump is in his own category and truth and falsehood, let’s suggest a different metric on its website, PolitiFact splits its Biden products and fact checks of Biden, in fact, checks about on. Our review of the first hundred days shows 13 fact checks of Biden and 106 fact checks about Biden. That’s eight to one disparity. In other words, they’re fact checking people who have dared to question or challenge Biden by a factor of eight to one. This is a joke. It’s a fake operation. It is another one of these left wing front groups. And they say PolitiFact says, well, PolitiFact can stick it. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 3
You remember Klowden and Piven, right? The two communist professors. Piven has passed away, but Cloward still here, they were a couple married. 1968, they wrote something that you probably haven’t heard of, it’s called Movements and Dicenzo’s Politics, not consensus dissenters. Explicitly arguing that, among other things, incendiary Islam and riots are legitimate and necessary acts of mass movements. This is from my new book. They declared that poor people, when mainly when they mobilize and disrupt disruptive protests for the obvious reason that they lack the resources to exert influence in conventional ways. By disruptive protests, we mean acts such as incendiary as riots, sit ins and other forms of civil disobedience, great surges and demands for relief benefits, rent strikes, wildcat strikes or obstructing production on assembly lines. Now, these are two individuals who were tenured professors on the public payroll for the longest time. And I write, the goal is to force the weakening of the system or as they call it, the regime, making it vulnerable to the movement’s demands. They write mass disruption, both its emergence and its successes as closely related to electoral politics, when the regime is insecure, it is more likely to bargain actively for support and may then issue appeals, which signal its vulnerability to demands from the bottom. Social movements thrive on conflict, by contrast, electoral politics demands strategies of consensus and coalition movements have the impact they do on electoral politics, mainly because the issues they raise and the strife they generate widened cleavages among voter groups. We call this the census politics, as opposed to consensus politics, to differentiate it from the usual process of building electoral influence by recruiting adherents and assembling coalitions or what might be called consensus politics, movements are not likely to have much impact unless economic and social conditions are already eroding established sectoral allegiances and coalitions. But then it is also the case. They write, that significant change Oread movements are not likely to emerge except during periods of economic and social instability. This is exactly what occurred last summer. And I write, if this seems familiar, it is the strategy is largely playing out in America’s streets and politics as Antifa, BLM and other Marxist anarchist groups have exploited, exploited both the initial economic collapse due to the coronavirus and the death of Jorge Floyd. These groups and others have been key in fomenting violent rioting, mostly but not exclusively in the inner cities, militant confrontations with law enforcement, the destruction of public monuments and targeting of federal courthouses, occupying parts of cities and so forth. Piven and Cloward also see opportunity in the transformation of the Democratic Party. I really want you to listen to this. This was written in 1968. But I found it. The discontinuities between social experience they write in electoral politics, the result from a static party system may well set the stage for realignment. And signs of electoral discontent may even prompt some rhetorical shifts in campaign appeals by major party operatives. That’s them and I come in, indeed, this transformation occurred the last election cycle where the leader, the Democrat, the leadership of the Democratic Party, was reluctant to criticize the violent revolutionary movements and indeed frequently disparaged efforts to control them. Furthermore, within the Democratic Party, there’s a growing allegiance to these movements and their causes as pivot’s and clarity at hope, which is reflected in part by the party’s rhetoric and policy radicalization, including the Biden Sanders 110 page unity agenda released during the campaign. And the growing radicalism of the party’s elected membership, including the likes of the so-called squad members. Now, these professors argue that the progress of mass movements will always be too slow as the American system is too difficult to mold into a truly revolutionary force, but there will be opportunities they right to use the system against the system and to create turmoil from within and without bringing pressure for revolutionary change, they wrote in 1968. Still, overall, I quote, Political leaders remain timid and conservative, trying to suppress the potential for realignment by bridging potential cleavages with general symbols and vague promises. Under these confusing conditions, discontented voters may be as atomized and ineffective as all voters are said to be in the absence of the party system. Social activists must be prepared to abandon the political parties as another way of putting pressure on them. They wrote, Just as people have to be mobilized to support parties and the issues and candidates they put forward, so do they have to be mobilized to desert them? Social movements are often the mobilizers of disaffection. In particular, social movements are politically effective precisely when they mobilize electoral dissatisfaction. And so what do they say? I mean, you’re going to have to read the book, they say the Democrat Party. Is the institution that we need to take over. That it is most ripe. It is most right to be taken over. It is most susceptible. To the communist movement. They say a hell of a lot more than that, and they’re not the only ones. And when you read their words and I provide a tremendous amount of information for you. You will see where this comes from and what’s going on before you get to the end of the book, where I propose a number of actions that need to be taken. I want to personally thank those of you who have so far preorder your copy of American Marxism. I think your. You’ll find this book very, very compelling. And we need to start discussing it on the air, both on radio and on TV. It’ll be important that you have it in your hands as soon as possible. Some of you might say, why didn’t I get this earlier and give it to my son or my daughter who’s in college or going to college? I’m losing them. I raised them to love this country and I’m losing them. For some of you who who have raised children who are in love with this country, but now you’re sending them off to high school and college. They need to be prepared, you need to be prepared. Your friends and neighbors need to be prepared, all patriots. You see what they’ve done to President Trump. You see the reaction of some in the Republican Party. Many in the Republican Party RINO types are not going to like this book. It’s not an attack on them in any way. But they just assume participate as a minority party. In the demise of this republic. People ask me why and I’ll say, who cares why, that’s just the way they are. They like their jobs, they want to keep their jobs. They have no idea what’s swirling around us, and so let me circle back to quote the late, great Pesach. Liz Cheney. No doubt believe she’s a warrior against communism or Marxism. And yet, as I speak today, she’s giving that movement aid and comfort within the United States. The Democrat Party is praising Liz Cheney. Why are they praising Liz Cheney, because they like the Cheney’s, they hate the Cheney. They wanted her father up on war charges. Liz Cheney, as smart as she may be, is not smart enough to understand what is swirling around. Same with some of our friends at National Review and certainly Paul Giago at The Wall Street Journal. They don’t have a clue. Oh, they’ll talk about critical race theory till they’re blue in the face, it’s bigger than critical race theory, it’s deeper than critical race theory. Marxism, American Marxism has spawned dozens. Abutments. Including in our own media. So to use January 6th. As a cudgel to try and destroy a significant percentage of the Republican Party, I would argue the greatest percentage. The Republican Party with lies, we know they’re lies now. And then to say, well, you’re against the Constitution, are you support what took place in the capital? But no, I don’t and I’m not. And why are you talking like one of them? So I want to personally thank I can tell. And there are thousands of you. They want to get engaged, the thousands of you who want to learn more. There’s thousands of you. Or prepared. The battle to take your country back. From these various Marxist movements and the Democrat Party, which they now pretty much have conquered. And I want to thank you. Because the preorders are going fabulously well, but it’s like everything else, there’s still not enough preorders. To build a movement. And make no mistake about it, behind this microphone, as we worked with the Tea Party movement. Back home, when I was a young guy working in the. Reagan revolution, and we were fought every step of the way, trust me, on this. We need more numbers. I keep saying there’s more of us than them, I really believe this. So if you get a chance to mosey on over to Amazon.com or Barnes & Noble or one of them. There will be, I think, greatly appreciated, of course, and I think very, very important. I will tell you something I’m not even allowed to tell you, I’m not even supposed to tell you the goal is to get the 100000 preorders. We are halfway there. And then the goal, I believe, is to get to a million once the book comes out and then we have our Patriots, we have our base, we have our movement. I’m not asking you to do anything heroic. This is just basic stuff. Unlike the great patriots of the past, I don’t have to ride a horse or get on a soapbox or write a pamphlet, I have this microphone. But it’s the craziest thing. People need to see it. In writing. Books last. Essays last. Radio programs. TV programs do not. Three Thursdays ago, what did I say on the air, who knows, I don’t even know, it may be profound, but you have to go back and look it up. And yet when you write something, it’s just a different way to communicate a human being to a human being. And I’ve concluded I have to use whatever platform I can get or that’s offered to me. To do this. I don’t know how long I’m going to be here behind this microphone on TV, writing a book, who knows who knows how long you’re going to be here? But while we’re here. Think about the men and women who came before us. If we Americans. Don’t take steps to preserve our republic. It’s not going to be preserved. Mitch McConnell is not going to do a. The Republican Party is not going to do a. It’s not going to happen. Donald Trump was president of the United States because of you. Ronald Reagan was president of the United States because of you. Consequently, you defeated the Soviet Union. You created the greatest economic growth in American history twice under Reagan and under Trump. You can do the sorts of things that are necessary to secure this country’s border. Folks, we need to go on offense. I told you about this book called Crisis Preparedness, I see now it’s number four on Amazon. My attitude is, go ahead, prepare. But the other side never prepares for crisis unless they go on offense. They’re not saving water or dried foods or anything of the sort. The time has gone. Where they need to write books about preparedness for themselves. Again, I’m not talking about violence in any respect, that’s the other side, and when they’re violent, their side pretends they’re not. We’re the ones who condemn it. We can’t rely on many of these institutions anymore because these institutions aren’t controlled in many respects by patriotic people. Many and a growing number of corporations. Virtually every professional sporting league, with a handful of exceptions. Virtually every movie, studio, television studio. Broadcast companies left and right. So it’s left us. Our public schools have become indoctrination mills, our colleges and universities have become the plaything of tenured Marxists. And we keep spending and spending and paying and paying you and me. I hope you’ll get your copy of American Marxism. And we’ll talk about these things when it comes out, but I want to showing as possible biggest showing us possible that we mean business. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 4
You have a federal judge in Washington, D.C., she goes by the name of Amy Berman Jackson, a former prosecutor, a clear Democrat hack. If you’re in front of this judge and you have ties to the Trump administration. You will not receive fair justice. It’s that simple. What can we do about it? You and I can’t do a damn thing about it, but this woman should be impeached and removed. She won’t be impeached because the Democrats control the House. And she won’t be removed because it’s a 50 50 Senate, and I guarantee you that probably 10 percent of the Republicans in the Senate would do anything about it anyway. Now, why am I focused on her, I’ve talked about her before with her outrageous gag order against Roger Stone. We’re putting Paul Minford in solitary confinement, you have terrorists and mobsters who aren’t in solitary confinement. She wanted to help break Manafort. She would not let St. defend himself in public, and so she would have been a great judge under Vladimir Putin or in China. She’s a disgrace, in my view, in the American justice system. That’s my opinion. She does not have the temperament or the independence to be a federal judge. Now, why am I getting angry about this? When we return, I’ll explain. I’ll be right back.