Ladies and gentlemen, the following segment of the podcast is presented exclusively by Hillsdale College now and it's one hundred and seventy fifth year. Hillsdale is a truly independent institution where learning is prized and intellectual enthusiasm is valued. Thank you for listening and my sincere appreciation to Hillsdale for their sponsorship is here.

Now, broadcasting from the underground command post, deep in the bowels of a hidden bunker, somewhere under the brick and steel of a nondescript building, we've once again made contact with our leader, Mark. Mark Levin, our number is eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one.

This is one of those shows where I think you want to listen for three hours because in the face of the juggernaut would have which would have put this election behind us.

I'm going to fight those headwinds. National Review, which has lost much, if not most of its appeal to many of us as an unsigned editorial today entitled Trump's Disgraceful and Game. They have legal writers over there who are utterly unencumbered with the constitutional law and the facts. Legal analysts all over TV, as usual. Who do not have the background, the education or the experience to be discussing these matters in any significant way, and they're not alone. You have these serious.

Serious studies and analysis by highly competent and reputable individuals who are never. Interviewed and their work. Is never discussed. And big media and on much of conservative media. The never Trump or in particular. They don't challenge the specific of the studies and the statistics that are presented. They just joined the the gaggle of howling coyotes out there who demand an endless. But this will not end in this election, it will not end in the next election. It won't end in the election after that.

If we do not return to a lawful and constitutional. Voting process. And I want to address this in a number of ways, I want to take one of the cases as an example, the Pennsylvania case I'm very, very familiar with.

Now, let me keep it as simple as I know how. Under the Pennsylvania Constitution. Under the Pennsylvania Constitution. You can only change the voting system by constitutional amendment, I heard my friend, brilliant man, Professor John Eastman, on a local show and in Washington to say, well, he's arguing there's an inherent power where a state legislature has the power to change.

The voting processes, that's not correct, with all due respect. That's not what the Pennsylvania Constitution says. We're not talking about inherent authority to delegate or to pass statutes. We're talking about fundamental law here. And what the state constitution specifically says now. The Constitution of Pennsylvania is the supreme law of Pennsylvania. So. It can only be amended if a proposed modification receives a majority vote of two consecutive sessions of the General Assembly. And then is approved by the electorate.

Two consecutive sessions of the General Assembly, and I might add, then I need to report it in in the state's newspapers and then the people of the state have an opportunity to vote the people. The state did not have an opportunity to vote. Why? Because the state legislature in Pennsylvania. Added the election changes to an omnibus bill called Act 77. And pass that ominous bill which was quickly signed by the governor of Pennsylvania. So you want to talk about disenfranchising the citizenry and the voters, the government of Pennsylvania disenfranchised the citizenry in the voters, the voters never had an opportunity to vote on this change in the election process.

On top of that. Stick with me. On top of that. The governor wanted more. He wanted to weaken the Maryland requirements under Act 77. Which was already unconstitutional. And the state legislature said, no, he wanted. To eliminate the requirement for signatures or signature matching, he wanted to eliminate the requirement for a possible date or whether it's not clear when the postal date is to count them anyway. He wanted to add three days till Friday, 5:00 p.m. after the Tuesday, eight p.m. close of the election precincts.

For receiving and carrying these mail in ballots, he was given his orders by the Biden campaign and the DNC and the lawyers working for them. Because this is what they've tried all over the country. So the state Supreme Court. Not only contributed to the constitutional violation of the state legislature. Because remember, the underlying law was unconstitutional. It then violated a second part of the Constitution, Article two. Section one, clause two, which leaves it to the legislature.

To determine Elector's. More on this in a moment I don't want to overload in the front here. And they adopted every single demand that the governor had made all Democrats. And this was quite. Close to election time after the primaries. Now they have an emergency provision. When you have emergency situations, Commonwealth election officials are required to publish notice of a referendum on a proposed amendment and a minimum of two newspapers in every county. And in the event that more than one emergency amendment is proposed, each additional amendment is to be voted on separately.

But in each case, whether it's an emergency or the normal amendment process under the Pennsylvania constitution, that people are to vote. But the people were disenfranchised. They never got an opportunity to vote. And so Congressman Mike Kelly. Candidate Sean Parnell and six other. Plaintiff's. Brought a lawsuit. Challenging the constitutionality. Of this act, 77. We're clearly the governor and the legislature. When around the constitutional limits which have been in place over 150 years, you know, the Pennsylvania legislature is one of the oldest legislatures in the country.

And there are very few exceptions. For non in-person voting, very few. And so the Democrats needed to crack this ad using. So they brought a lawsuit. And they requested. An immediate emergency writ of injunction to prevent. The governor of Pennsylvania, the secretary of state of Pennsylvania and any and all other officials from continuing to certify electors. To the Electoral College. Until their constitutional challenge could be heard. Till their constitutional challenge could be heard, they said their goal is to restore the status quo.

And ultimately to undo that which has already been certified. And Act 77 was the most expansive and fundamental change, the Pennsylvania election law. In really the history of Pennsylvania, certainly the modern history of Pennsylvania. And what happened? Is that this case was brought in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. And that court that that brave judge, Patricia McKinnon, I believe her name is. She found that the petitioners, the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of the case.

And so she she began to intervene with a preliminary injunction. Now, a preliminary injunction means. That looking at all the facts and the law. And just looking at the papers, the judge believes. That the plaintiff will, in fact, win on the merits, on the constitutional merits, and she said so. And she said so should she scheduled a hearing for this past Friday? To allow both sides. To have their day in court, the plaintiffs and the attorney general of Pennsylvania is a big time left wing Democrat.

So what did the. What does the attorney general of Pennsylvania, big left wing Democrat, do? He said, the hell with this, I'm running to my five Democrat friends on the on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, these five there's seven members on the court, five of whom are radical leftists. Rogue justices, they're elected they were elected by the labor unions and the teacher unions. That poured in an enormous amount of money when the Republicans weren't paying attention yet again.

They are, in fact, special pleaders for the Democrat Party, in fact, a few years back when it came to gerrymandering, they took the power of gerrymandering away from the Republican legislature, gave it to themselves, redistrict a number of congressmen and I believe two Republican congressmen lost as a result of what that court did.

So what did the Supreme Court do, they immediately took up. The motion filed by the Democrat attorney general, remember, this attorney general said if all votes are counted, there's no way Biden can lose. Remember him? And he was up this time for election, so he had a. In a dog in this race, a dog in this fight. And so literally within 24 or 48 hours, the majority on this court. Issue what's called a curium opinion.

They didn't hear a single word of testimony, nor did they want to. They issued a rather short opinion and what did they say? Latches. Latches, latches. Unlatches means. Well, this is an untimely case, should have been brought earlier. Should have been brought earlier. Yes. You're bringing it now because we've had an election, that's not the time to bring this, the time to bring it is before an election. And they also said.

That the plaintiffs. Shall not have their day in court that this ruling is final with prejudice. And don't come back. And they slam the door shut. You following all this, Mr.. Larches. Latches. Here's the problem with latches. In Pennsylvania, they have some strict standing rules. Standing as a general matter means. You don't get to go to court and run around and seek declaratory relief all the time. You can only be in front of this court.

If you've been harmed in some way, are you accusing somebody or some institution of harming you otherwise you don't have standing? Under Pennsylvania law. Congressman Kelly, candidate Sean Parnell on the other six plaintiffs had no standing if they would have brought this case earlier. They had no standing. They had to wait for the election in order to bring their case. Which is exactly what they did. So according to the state Supreme Court in Pennsylvania. You have no right to come to court at all.

Because if you don't have standing before the election and it's Lachs after the election. You can never be a plane if you could never challenge the constitutionality of the law. This is why I'm furious with some of these so-called legal analysts. In some of these places where they claim to have. Really smart people writing about these laws, they know nothing of what they speak. I'm from Pennsylvania. So now what? To the plaintiffs, do what can they do now?

I'll tell you after the break, we'll be right back. Much love in. As we enter the Christmas season, most of us stop to consider our many blessings. While Hillsdale College wishes to thank you for standing with them as they celebrate over one hundred and seventy five years of blessings since 1844, Hillsdale has held fast to its mission to provide the kind of education essential to preserving free government. And for decades, the college has extended its educational mission on behalf of liberty through a variety of outreach programs.

Perhaps you receive an Prima's for free every month, or have taken one of Helstone excellent free online courses or have attended one of Hillsdale free regional events. Now you know of Hillsdale s refusal to take even one penny of government money. This independence allows the college to focus on promoting its core purposes, learning character, faith and freedom without any government interference. At no time in our nation's history has there been a greater need for the kind of classical liberal arts education that Hillsdale offers on its campus and nationwide.

So during this season of Blessings Hillsdale, thank you for your partnership. In extending its mission to the country to learn more about Hillsdale College, visit Lhevinne for Hillsdale Dotcom. That's Levien for Hillsdale Dotcom, live for Hillsdale Dotcom.

They only have two minutes here, so I'm going to continue this after the bottom of the hour. So let's say you're the plaintiff for what they call. The petitioner or the complainant, whatever, where do you go now that the rogue majority on the state Supreme Court has shut you down?

And even one of my former friends writing in a conservative site says the court is on strong standing because he doesn't understand the rules in Pennsylvania.

I just wish these guys would either really dig in or shut the hell up. Because are they just another loss, another loss? Now you understand why I take the time to go into these cases as I am this case in my home state, the Commonwealth of Virginia excuse me, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, where I was born. The heart of liberty, Philadelphia. And look what's taken place here. Well, in order to bring a case to the United States Supreme Court and have a chance that they will accept your writ.

Of surgery is what we call it. And convince four justices to take up the case, you have to have what's called a federal question. Because the the Supreme Court, with some significant exceptions, won't just reach into a state and police what's going on within the state.

So what are the arguments?

What are the federal questions that are relevant for the U.S. Supreme Court to review?

Some of you are ahead of me. I know already. Well, when we return, I'll tell you exactly what they are. I'll be right back. As we enter the Christmas season, most of us stop to consider our many blessings, while Hillsdale College wishes to thank you for standing with them as they celebrate over 175 years of blessings since 1844, Hillsdale has held fast to its mission to provide the kind of education essential to preserving free government. And for decades, the college has extended its educational mission on behalf of liberty through a variety of outreach programs.

Perhaps you receive an Prima's for free every month, or have taken one of Helstone excellent free online courses or have attended one of Hillsdale free regional events. Now you know of Hillsdale s refusal to take even one penny of government money. This independence allows the college to focus on promoting its core purposes, learning character, faith and freedom without any government interference. At no time in our nation's history has there been a greater need for the kind of classical liberal arts education that Hillsdale offers on its campus and nationwide.

So during this season of Blessings, Hillsdale thanks you for your partnership. In extending its mission to the country. To learn more about Hillsdale College, visit Lhevinne for Hillsdale Dotcom. That's Levien for Hillsdale Dotcom. Lhevinne for Hillsdale Dotcom. My club in a proud conservative, no ifs, ands or buts, call in at eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one or I left.

This tawdry story is now the plaintiffs. Are stuck in the prison of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and that court system. How do they break out? Well, there's always had to deal with a federal question, you need a federal question or a federal issue. You don't appeal to the district court or a circuit court. This is an appeal from a state supreme court to the U.S. Supreme Court. There's not only a federal question here, there's not only important federal question here.

There is a grave federal constitutional question here. This relates specifically and directly to how we choose the president and vice president of the United States, let alone members of Congress. Specifically. To the Electoral College. And among other things, we can look at Bush versus Gore. With the U.S. Supreme Court stepped in. Under the great leadership of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, unfortunately, he's no longer with us. Instead, we get a lightweight by the name of John Roberts.

As a general rule, the court wrote, This court defers to a state courts interpretation of a state statute. But in the case of a law enacted by a state legislature applicable not only to elections, to state offices, but also to the selection of presidential electors. The legislature is not acting solely under the authority, given it by the people of the state, but by virtue of a direct grant of authority made under Article two, Section one, Clause two of the United States Constitution, Bush versus Palm Beach County Canvassing Board five thirty one U.S. 1776 2000.

When a state legislature therefore violates its state's constitution. Purportedly in furtherance of its plenary authority to regulate federal elections and appoint electors, it also violates the United States Constitution. Again, from the Bush decision, a significant departure from the legislative scheme for appointing presidential electors presents a federal constitutional issue. Now, if the legislature. If the legislature itself. If the legislature itself violates its own constitution. It's in the same place. It's in the same place. Article one, Section four, and Article two, Section one of the Constitution grant plenary authority to state legislatures.

To enact laws that govern the conduct of elections yet. While the legislature may enact laws governing the conduct of elections, no legislative enactment, they contravene the requirements. Of the Pennsylvania or United States constitutions, in other words, they have plenary power within their constitutional authority, not beyond it. And because the state legislature failed to strictly comply with the requirements. Of the Pennsylvania Constitution, Article 11, Section one for amending its constitution. Act 77, no excuse absentee voting provision.

Is fatally defective. And unconstitutional under state and federal law. Now, as for the Supreme Court's decision of Pennsylvania. It violated the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause and due process clause, as applies to the eight plaintiffs. Basically, they're barred access to the courts forever in perpetuity. It's a clear violation of the right to petition the government for redress. And that right of access to judicial proceedings is a component of the right to petition government that is upheld under the federal constitution.

I want to circle back to this issue of latches, you were too late. In other words, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's use of that is erroneous. That's also subject to review by the U.S. Supreme Court not to get into the nitty gritty, but. This case involves not only a federally created right, but a federal right for which the sole remedy is inequity. In other words, a court takes up the case and looks at it. Makes a decision based on the law and based on reason.

The duty is that a federal court sitting as national courts throughout the country. To apply their own principles in enforcing equitable right? As again, the Supreme Court wrote in Bush versus Gore in 2000, we deal here not with an ordinary election, but as an election for the president of the United States. And they said in the context of a presidential election, state imposed restrictions had a uniquely important national interests for president and vice president of the United States or the only elected officials who represent all the voters of the nation.

A significant departure from this legislative scheme represents a federal constitutional question. The text of the election law itself and not justice interpretation by the courts of the states takes on independent significance. Whether the state court has denied has denied rights asserted under local law, the protection of which the Constitution guarantees is a question upon which. The petitioners are entitled, that's a separate Supreme Court decision and so forth. Now, let's go back to this latches issue, which is what the state Supreme Court held its hat on in which, oh, yes, it's a lot easier.

Sure, no question about that. They're too late. I already told you. That they could not have met the standards for standing in the first place, they had to wait for a harm. The harm was the election. They came in soon thereafter and now they're told, too late. You should have come in earlier. So under Pennsylvania law, there's two elements for latches, No. One. A delay arising from appellant's failure to exercise due diligence, that's clearly not this and to prejudice to the appellate court resulting from the delay that has prejudice to the secretary of state, the governor and so forth, that that's clearly not the case.

That's clearly not the case. So even when it comes to the issue of so-called latches. The state Supreme Court. Just on the issue of Lachs was wrong. In plain English. The five rogue Democrat elected. Labor boss, judges or justices on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court knew exactly what they were doing. They know exactly what they were doing. And if the U.S. Supreme Court does not step in. And address this. Then the electors will be sent the certificate of ascertainment in what is called be sent to the archivist, will then in turn collect them all from the states and send them to a joint session of Congress by statute meets on January 6th, the new Congress.

To count the votes. The Pennsylvania electors will be tainted. Because they will be there in violation of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court excuse me, of the Pennsylvania Constitution. They will be tainted because they will be there in violation of the Pennsylvania constitution. And meanwhile, people who say, let's move along, let's get over it. If this isn't fixed in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, it'll come up again in the next election. That is, it will constantly be a recycling of an unconstitutional act every time there's a vote in this key battleground state.

Let's get on with it right here. Marc Thiessen and others, nice guy. Good man. Let's get on with it. Trump can run in 2024. He could be Grover Cleveland here. My dear friend, Victor Davis Hanson. Like Andrew Jackson, you know, he may take. No, no, no, no, no. The fix is in for the future, too. For the next election. The fix is in. If this isn't resolved.

Donald Trump got 74 million votes, he got 11 million more votes than before he got more votes than any man in history, except supposedly now Joe Biden. Nobody's going to perform like that again. You want House seats, you held on to a Senate, even though 23 of 33 seats were up. And of course, we have Georgia, but I'm not talking about Georgia right now, I'm talking about what is what is. This is going to happen again.

He's the most popular Republican to run for president since Ronald Reagan had his massive landslide. There's no question about it. And even he couldn't get enough votes. To outrun the changes in Pennsylvania, notice this. I'm not even arguing fraud here in this case, I'm I'm sorry, but. I don't need one example of fraud because the fraud is the court. The fraud is the court, that's a separate case, this case I'm talking about wasn't even brought by the Trump campaign.

It was brought by Congressman Mike Kelly, courageous, Sean Parnell, courageous, and six other plaintiffs. They brought this case themselves. This is part of the Trump campaign. And to me, this is one of the most important cases. Of all the cases in the United States. One of them. It goes it determines whether we are still a constitutional republic or not. In addition to the issues of whether or not we have a legitimate vote, don't get me wrong, those are key cases.

Those are key cases. So you had a rogue act by a legislature. Ever rogue decision by five Democrats on the Supreme Court, and the question is whether it will be tainted now, you might say, well, Mark, what do you expect them to do? There are two and a half, two point six million male votes. What are you saying we should disenfranchise all those people? Mark? Is that what you actually expect these justices to do?

Mark? I expect these justices to uphold the United States Constitution. They do not need to fashion any relief. They should uphold the United States Constitution and send the matter back. To the Pennsylvania state legislature. Because in the end. These are political decisions within the context. Of the state and federal constitution. The Supreme Court doesn't have to fashion any remedy other than upholding the Constitution of the United States. Which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is bastardizing. Which the Pennsylvania legislature has bastardise.

The question is, will the Supreme Court allow them to get away with it? The Supreme Court did not allow the Florida Supreme Court to get away with it. And in the end, it'll be up to Congress because, like it or not, media, like it or not, National Review, like it or not, Trump haters and all the rest. In our country in the end. The Congress counts the electors. And the Congress makes the final decision, we're not a direct democracy, we never had been.

Although we're turning into one. I hope these past 45 minutes have explained this one case to you. Why these are serious battles and according to National Review and others. According to the Democrats, according to Republicans across the country. They should throw in the towel and allow allow this injustice to stand. Is that what you believe, ladies and gentlemen? Well, I don't think so. We'll be right back. Much love in. As we enter the Christmas season, most of us stop to consider our many blessings.

While Hillsdale College wishes to thank you for standing with them as they celebrate over one hundred and seventy five years of blessings since 1844, Hillsdale has held fast to its mission to provide the kind of education essential to preserving free government. And for decades, the college has extended its educational mission on behalf of liberty through a variety of outreach programs. Perhaps you receive an Prima's for free every month, or have taken one of Helstone excellent free online courses or have attended one of Hillsdale free regional events.

Now you know of Hillsdale s refusal to take even one penny of government money. This independence allows the college to focus on promoting its core purposes, learning character, faith and freedom without any government interference. At no time in our nation's history has there been a greater need for the kind of classical liberal arts education that Hillsdale offers on its campus and nationwide. So during this season of Blessings, Hillsdale thanks you for your partnership and extending its mission to the country.

To learn more about Hillsdale College, visit Lhevinne for Hillsdale Dotcom. That's Levien for Hillsdale Dotcom. Lhevinne for Hillsdale Dotcom and.

Some might argue. Bookmark Article two gives the state legislature plenary power in the federal constitutional context, so it doesn't so a state can violate its own constitution all at once and can do whatever it wants.

Pretty much. It can do pretty much whatever it wants. No, it can't. Is that what the framers of the Constitution said? The states were creating a federal government, the states were creating a manner in which you would choose electors. And they came up with a rather complex process. To protect us from factions, to protect us from from the mob. They never would have dreamed that a state would violate its own constitution. Never would have dreamt that a state would violate its own constitution.

For the purposes of exercising plenary power under Article two, because what are the limits of that, there are no limits. There's no evidence to support that whatsoever. That's number one. Number two, this does not, in fact, empower the courts to do whatever they want, that's irrational to no logical argument. The court. Only has the power of what the court's supposed to do, judicial review, not legislative authority even within the state. So my view that makes no sense either.

And so I take strong objection to those two points. That a state is free to do whatever it wants, including violating its own constitution in order to. Send electors and as a matter of fact, let me just say this, that's not been the practice of states. There have been a couple of examples, the. The court in in in Florida in 2000, not the legislature, then the court. And now Pennsylvania, we have the state legislature and the court.

So states have. With rare exception, over the entire period that we've had this constitution. It violated their own constitutions for the purpose of choosing electors. So I get the abstract arguments and so forth, but that's what they are, their abstract. The rap stretched so no, so no, in my view, anyway, state legislatures cannot violate their own constitution for the purposes of serving the federal constitution.

Particularly when they have precise election laws, precise provisions in their constitution about how they're going about it.

I'll be right back. From the Westwood One podcast network. He's here now broadcasting live from the underground command post, deep in the bowels of a hidden bunker, somewhere under the brick and steel of a nondescript building, we've once again made contact with our leader, Mike. Hello, America. Mark Levin here, our number eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one. Eight, seven, seven, three, eight. One three eight one one.

Offline debating. It's it's it's worrisome to me, it's troublesome to me. That anyone would think a state legislature could do anything. Violate its own constitution, violate its own statutes in order to fulfill its obligation under Article two to plenary power, my.

It's a plenary power, it's not a lawless power. Let's remember the beginning, the states created the federal government. When this constitution was adopted in Philadelphia, it had to be ratified by state conventions. For many of the people who were at those state conventions. The states were back then, of course, considered more powerful. Then the federal government. And in many of these conventions, the allegiance was first and foremost to the state, not to the federal government that they had created.

Can you imagine? They ratify the Constitution with Article two.

Which gives the state legislature plenary power and then we circle back in 2020 and we argue, well, that doesn't mean the legislature has to follow the legislature's constitution.

They can do whatever they want. Moreover, if you don't agree with me, it means the state court can do whatever it wants. This is what happens. When people take their thinking too far. They're in their own world. There is nothing at all to support that position zero. Zero in constitutional history. And Bush versus Gore doesn't support that position either, by the way. So, no, you can't ignore your state constitution and it's not even necessary to ignore your state constitution.

To exercise plenary power, what's meant by plenary power in the selection of electors is not to include unconstitutional or lawless action by. By a state legislature acting tyrannically. That's not what's meant. This is a debate for another day now. We had on this program the other week Professor Lessig of Harvard. And he and he wrote a pretty nasty piece in USA Today about what my position was without knowing what my position was with respect to Elector's.

And I saw on the Internet over the weekend some people done some digging, and in 2016, Professor Lessig of Harvard had a little different attitude about. Fidelity toward these electors. And here's Politico. In 2016, December 2016, Professor Lessig, 20 Trump electors could flip. Larry Lessig, a Harvard University constitutional law professor. I made a brief run for the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, claimed that 20 Republican members of the Electoral College are considering voting against Donald Trump, a figure that would put anti Trump activists more than halfway towards stalling Trump's election.

I think they wound up with two or something like that. Less anti Trump Group Elector's Trust, it's an offering pro bono legal counsel to Republican presidential electors considering ditching Trump has been acting as a clearinghouse for electors to privately communicate their intentions. The court has since ruled.

That lesson, another one. Is taking his abstractions just a little too far, but that's not my point. My point is that this is a man who today would say, no, no, no, these electors, they must. They must comply with the outcome of the election in the state. Even though he took a different position. And here it is in The Washington Post, November 24, 2016. Here he is again. The Constitution lets the Electoral College choose the winner.

They should choose Clinton. Now, he was very much opposed to recall. To allowing the states. To choose the electors to the Electoral College now, clearly they can. Whether you support that idea or not, as a practical matter, a political matter, as a constitutional matter, clearly they can.

He writes, Conventional wisdom tells us that the Electoral College requires that the person who lost the popular vote this year must nonetheless become our president. That view is an insult to our framers. And then he twists history, it's not an insult to the framers, it's kind of actually what the framers intended.

He also supports the national popular vote if it were up to him to get rid of the Electoral College. So all these Republican, smaller Republican institutions, these non-democratic, small D institutions. They want to eliminate on the left. Because they want the cities in the metropolitan areas to rule the day. There have been outstanding analysis, people who understand statistics far more than I do. That have been prepared and these reports and have been put out. None of which that I can tell, and I admit I can't watch TV all day and rarely do I can't I can't watch all the websites all day and rarely do.

But I don't believe they've been directly addressed in any significant way where somebody say at National Review or elsewhere has said that statistical analysis by that Princeton mathematician or the or the physicist from from Oxford away, that's all washed up. I haven't seen that. Maybe it's out there somewhere. If it is, it's the rare case. But there are a couple of terrific pieces out there. I want to start with our buddy Daniel Horowitz at The Blaze. Says there's been a lot of focus on the number of mail in ballots counted in Pennsylvania and the illegal state Supreme Court decisions that enabled them.

But what's even more to examine is the impossible margins Joe Biden would have achieved just among those mail in ballots and just in Pennsylvania in order to obtain the unofficial lead he currently has now at this point. Those who listen in from The Washington Post in The New York Times are writing about he's a conspiracy theorist, the never Trump fires coming out of their nostrils. I think it normally does in all the usual reprobates are out there. But I'm not doing this for them and doing this for you.

Horowitz writes, Here are the facts, we know that two point six million mail in ballots have been counted in Pennsylvania election returns. In addition to nearly four point two million Election Day votes. We also know from the secretary of state there that Trump won Election Day votes two point seven million to one point four million. But are we to believe that Biden won 76 percent of mail in ballots? Yes, Maylands overwhelmingly skewed Democrat like Election Day votes, skewed Republican.

But they're not all from Democrats. We know that sixty four point seven percent of those votes were from registered Democrats, twenty three point seven from Republicans and eleven point six from nonpartisan or other party voters. What does this mean in simple arithmetic, says my friend crunched the numbers, who is a.

I guess some kind of a mathematician and showed that had Biden won 95 percent of returned Democrat Marillyn votes alone. Twenty one percent of return Republican votes and 80 percent of her turned independent votes in the Maylands, he would still have come up short of his margin of victory reported in the unofficial tally.

In other words, these are impossible numbers, as a practical matter. Says, we know those numbers are absurd. There's no way Biden won twenty twenty one percent of mail in ballots from registered Republicans in the state. Exit polls show Biden getting just eight percent of the Republican vote overall. And while the 95 percent number for Democrat Mallon's is more believable, Exit showed him getting 92. The notion he got 80 percent of mailings from independents is nearly impossible. Exit polls showed Biden winning 52 percent of the vote of independents overall.

He got 80 percent. Exit polls, OK? It would defy logic to think that there was such a quantum qualitative gap between the type of independents who came out on Election Day and those who voted by mail. Assuming the mailings broke down in accordance with the exit polls, Biden would be down by 230000 votes. Even if every one of the two point six million Maylands were truly valid and had proper matching signatures, so he's saying if you look at the exit polls, which aren't perfect.

And assuming that every one of those votes was illegitimate, no fraud, he would have lost by over 200000 votes. So you have to believe, according to the numbers. That Biden got 95 percent of the Democrat Marilyns, OK, 21 percent. Or one fifth of the Republican Malinche, no way. Eighty percent of the independent ballots that showed just 52 percent had supported him, no way. And these figures that I'm giving you to be interesting, to hear those who say at Trump, it's a disgrace.

I would love to know how they deal with this. They just don't. And speaking of signature validation, this statistical anomaly should lend a lot of suspicion to the already questionably low rejection rate of mail in ballots this year called the 2016 Election Administration and Voting Survey, the rejection rate last election was just a tad under one percent in the Keystone State, even though there were only 266 thousand mail in ballots, which are mainly those who have experience filing absentee ballots before.

This year, with 10 times that number two point six million Melon's, consisting primarily of first timers, were to believe that there was just point zero three eight percent that were invalid. Some estimates show the mail in ballots from first timers are three times more likely to be rejected. If I were to believe the acceptance rate this year was twenty seven times higher than in twenty sixteen. Can you imagine what we would have found if there was an attempt to audit and match all two point six million ballots for valid signatures and other information?

But thanks to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, there are no need for valid signatures or matching signatures. Think about that. And he writes more compelling information that I don't have time to get into. When we come back, there's a fascinating piece also in The Spectator U.S.. By a man is a pollster by profession, but he's also director of the Democracy Institute. Since you won't hear this in most places, I want to make sure you hear it from me.

I'll be right back. Much love in. Did you know your family can save over 800 dollars a year just by switching to pure talk from Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile? Think about it. What could your family do with an extra 800 dollars? You don't even have to sacrifice coverage. Pure talk has exactly the same coverage, same bars as one of the big carriers. But they charge you half. You definitely don't have to sacrifice customer service. Their team is based right here in the U.S. and are some of the nicest people you'll ever talk to.

So don't wait anymore. Get unlimited talk, text and two gigs of data for just 20 bucks a month. And if you go over on data usage, they don't charge you for it. No, not even a penny. So go to Pure Talk, USA Dotcom and a promo code Lhevinne podcast. That's Levien podcast. And when you do, you'll also save 50 percent off your first month. Folks, this is the best. That's pure talk.

USA Dotcom Promo Code Lhevinne podcast. Pure Talk. USA Simply Smarter Wireless.

All right, by the way, it looks like the office of the president elect, of which there's none. Looks like he would select if he could. I love the way people say establishment feet.

These are radical nut jobs. I don't care if they've been in the establishment.

You've got a wide assortment of people, of course, on identity politics, which the media fully embraces, except when it comes to most of their newsrooms. They're into color. But there's no diversity of thought. About a battle between the moderates and the progressives, Mr. Producer. No, it's not. It's a battle between the Trotskyites and the Stalinists. You've got people who Biden would bring in if he could. Who have strong links to communist China. You have people he would bring in who have strong links.

To the anti-Semitic BDS movement, yet people who would bring in who are sellouts, the Islama Nazi regime in Tehran. And that's just foreign policy. That's just foreign policy. You got a Russia collusion, nut jobs. One of whom wants to be the director of OMB. So let's not pretend, of course, the media in this country are very, very sad. Nobody's controversial. No. Because they all socialize with each other, they all celebrate with each other, they all have sex with each other.

It's grotesque. The media are a contemptible joke. Let me start this from Patrick Basham. Spectator U.S.. Why am I reading this, because he writes it better than I can possibly know it. Director of the. Discovery Institute and also a professional pollster, he says to say out loud that you find the results of the 2020 presidential election odd is to invite derision. Must be a crank or conspiracy theorist. Mark me down as a crank. Then I'm a pollster and I find this election to be deeply puzzling.

I also think the Trump campaign is still well within its right to contest the tabulations. Something very strange happened in America's democracy in the early hours of Wednesday, November four, and the days that followed.

It's reasonable for a lot of Americans to want to find out exactly what. See, this is what separates serious people from unserious people.

People are seriously questioning what's taken place here and then those who are shooting spitballs from the peanut gallery who contribute absolutely nothing, zero, nothing substantive. They give their opinion when nobody asks them their opinion. First, consider some facts, Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection. He got 11 million more votes than in 2016, the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent. By way of comparison, President Obama was comfortably re-elected in 2012 with three point five million fewer votes than he received in 2008.

Trump's vote increased so much because, according to exit polls, he performed far better with many key demographic groups, 95 percent of Republicans voted for him. He did extraordinarily well with rural, male, working class whites having the highest share of all minority votes for Republicans since 1960. Trump grew his support among black voters by 50 percent over 2016. Nationally, Joe Biden's black support fell well below 90 percent, the level below which Democratic presidential candidates usually lose.

Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote to 35 percent, with 60 percent or less of the national Hispanic vote. It's arithmetically impossible for a Democratic presidential candidate to win. Florida, Arizona, Nevada and New Mexico bellwether state swung further in Trump's direction than in 2016. Florida, Ohio and Iowa each defied America's media polls with huge wins for Trump. Since 1852, only Richard Nixon has lost the Electoral College after winning this trio. And that 1960 defeat to John Kennedy is still the subject of great suspicion.

Midwestern states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers, Ohio likewise swings with Florida. Kerry tallies show that outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump's direction. Yet Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin because an apparent avalanche of black votes in four specific cities, Detroit and three, rather, Detroit, Philadelphia and Milwaukee. More on this, it's important when I return.

Americans need to defend liberty and defeat tyranny. Call the magazine show now at eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one.

Suppose the state legislature in Pennsylvania. I'll get back to the House passed a law. That said, let's say it's controlled by Democrats. Let's say it's the California legislature. Super duper massive majorities in both state houses in the House and the Senate. Democrat, governor, Democrat, this Democrat that Republicans within spitting distance. And they said, you know what? We're going to pass a statute that only Democrats can be elector's. Under Article two. If it's your position that the state legislature has plenary power even outside their state constitution, then what would stop that?

Nothing. And I can think of a thousand examples like that. And that clearly destroys what the framers in the ratifiers intended. Clearly destroys it, plenary power doesn't mean lawlessness. Or absurdity. They can't. These were smart men. They've been plenary power within the state constitution and within the federal constitution. Remember, for many of them, it was the state first. States created the federal constitution and the federal government. They wanted the power with the legislatures.

But truth be told. They weren't all that excited about state power either they wanted to be left alone, they believed in individual liberty. They believed in the Declaration of Independence. Even these state constitutions would come later. Let's get back to this compelling piece. Midwestern states, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers. Ohio likewise swings with Florida currently, and by the way, Trump won Florida and Ohio big and same with Iowa.

Can tallies show that outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump's direction? If Biden leads in Michigan and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia and Milwaukee. Pynes winning margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these three cities. As coincidentally, his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure a victory, he did not receive comparable levels of support.

Among blacks and other demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victors, I just want to be clear about that.

There were massive spikes in black voting in a handful of cities. Not a New York. Not in L.A., not in Chicago. Philadelphia, Detroit and Milwaukee. That doesn't even pique the interest. Of National Review or any of the others. So what is their answer to that? Now, Trump is a disgrace that's there at. He goes on. We're told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties, he only won 524 counties as opposed to the eight hundred and seventy three counties Obama won in 2008.

Yet Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes. Victorious presidential candidates, especially challengers, usually have down ballot coattails. Biden did not. The Republicans held the Senate and enjoyed a red wave, quote unquote, in the House, where they gained a large number of seats while winning all 27 toss up contests, Trump's party did not lose. A single state legislature actually made gains at the state level, picked up three. Another anomaly is found the comparison between the polls and on polling metrics.

The latter include party registration trends, what he's saying there is the Republicans far out registered the Democrats in these battleground states.

The candidates respective primary votes again. Trump had enormous number of primary votes, candidate enthusiasm, social media followings, broadcast and digital media ratings, online searches, the number of especially small donors. Trump had many more small donors than Obama than Biden had big donors and the number of individuals betting on each candidate. Despite poor recent performances, media and academic polls have an impressive 80 percent record predicting the winner during the modern era. But when the poll's error, non polling metrics do not.

The ladder that I just went through have 100 percent record, every nonpolluting metric forecast Trump's re-election. For Trump to lose this election, the mainstream polls needed to be correct, which they were not. Furthermore, for Trump, the lose not only did one or more of these metrics have to be wrong for the first time ever. But every single one of them had to be wrong, and at the very same time, not impossible outcome, but extremely unlikely nonetheless.

The following peculiarities also lack a compelling explanation in addition to what he's already written. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. And you remember that I remember turning to my wife's I've never seen an election like this, but they shut down the polling places at one one thirty two in the morning and they go home and say, we'll see in the morning. I Turner, I even said that I've never seen an election like this.

Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers. Statistically, abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed their unusually large in size hundreds of thousands and had an unusually high 90 percent and above Biden to Trump ratio. So hundreds of thousands of ballots came in with 90 percent and above for Biden. Late arriving ballots were counted in Pennsylvania, 23000 absentee ballots have a possible postal return dates and another eighty six thousand have such extraordinary return dates.

They raised serious questions. The failure to match signatures on mail in ballots, the destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates, as I mentioned earlier, despite the massive expansion of male voting. Such as Biden's narrow margin that as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, quote, If the state simply impose the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, Trump wins the election. Missing votes in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50000 votes held on 47 USB cards.

Our missing. Where's the proof of fraud, Mark non-resident voters? Matt Brainard's Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20000 312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Syria's chain of custody breakdowns and violent residential addresses, record numbers of dead people voting ballots in pristine condition without creases. That is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law. Statistical anomalies in Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted for the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the exact same fifty point five to forty nine point ninety five percent margin in every single batch.

It's particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities weren't Biden's favorite.

Whether the cause was simple human error or nefarious activity or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened. If you think that only weirdos have legitimate concerns about these findings and claims, maybe the weirdness lies in you. Patrick Basham, director of the Democracy Institute and a professional pollster. Why don't you join a conspiracy, not what what what is it with you? There are no good answers to any of this. No good answers to any of this. I'll be right back.

Much love in. Did you know your family can save over 800 dollars a year just by switching to pure talk from Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile? Think about it. What could your family do with an extra 800 dollars? You don't even have to sacrifice coverage. Pure talk has exactly the same coverage, same bars as one of the big carriers. But they charge you half. You definitely don't have to sacrifice customer service. Their team is based right here in the U.S. and are some of the nicest people you'll ever talk to.

So don't wait anymore. Get unlimited talk, text and two gigs of data for just 20 bucks a month. And if you go over on data usage, they don't charge you for it. No, not even a penny. So go to Pure Talk, USA Dotcom and a promo code Lytvyn podcast that's elevon podcast. And when you do, you'll also save 50 percent off your first month. Folks, this is the best. That's pure talk. USA Dotcom Promo Code Lhevinne podcast.

Pure Talk. USA Simply Smarter Wireless.

How can Time magazine of a person of the Year when there's no Time magazine anymore, and by Time magazine, it's a Web site, I think, right, Mr. Producer?

So who cares? Who cares, probably picked some lunatic anyway. I mean, over the years, they've picked Stalin and Hitler and so, you know, oh, I don't because they want to create kind of why didn't say we like them. We're just it's the Person of the year, you know. You know, this election is not over until all the legal votes have been counted and all the legal votes have been discarded. And what the corporate media incessantly says and the usual establishment types now, there's never any fraud and the Democrats are very honest.

We all know this. That's what history tells us, doesn't it? And here's a piece at Red State Dotcom, Democrats are currently stealing a House seat in New York. Well, most of us. Focusing on the fraud that happened in the presidential election, it's also worth noting that other Republicans are also getting screwed by sketchy late rushes of Democrat votes counted well after the election ended. One case has become especially egregious and it's taking place in New York. The race for New York 22, that's a rural district, has suddenly flipped to the Democrat by 13 votes.

And the story behind how that happened will have you punching walls or face palming, whichever you prefer. If they're trailing in the polls, over 28000 votes on election night, upstate Democratic Representative Anthony Ride ISSI claim victory Wednesday in the 22nd District over his Republican challenger by 13 votes. Yes, a Democrat that was losing by 28000 votes in a district white race, and it's a that's a huge margin in a congressional race. Is now claim victory by 13 votes because a Democrat judge stepped in and put his stamp of approval on enough rejected ballots.

To make it happen, so he counted the votes, knew what she needed or he needed. And swung the district. The implication here is insane, if a single judge can decide he gets to be the arbiter of which ballots are accepted even after they were rightly rejected, under the law that opens every nearly every close race up to judicial meddling. The grand scheme of things has some of the Republicans trumped up losing here, one House seat isn't a catastrophe.

He or she writes, The GOP will still be well positioned to retake the chamber in 2022, but it sends a message that this kind of tampering is acceptable.

And that's the whole point with the challenges going on on behalf of the president, whether they're Article two violations of the 14th Amendment, due process, equal protection violations or flat out fraud violations.

It's so ubiquitous in so many places. It's like herding squirrels. And then you have the the peashooters and the and the peanut gallery. Oh, let's get this over with a touch of scratch. Where is the fraud when Gabe.

Regardless, this is the danger of mail in ballots and judges being allowed to nullify election law at their whim. We saw the same thing on a larger scale in Pennsylvania, where a court unilaterally decided the election laws simply no longer apply. We've talked about this. Republicans control a lot of state levers of power from governorships to state houses, they need to be wielding that power to fix this stuff. And if they don't, they can expect to be slowly weeded out by the very fraud they've ignored.

Yes. You know what the Pennsylvania legislature is doing on November 30th, Mr. Producers', today, November 30th. You know what they're doing today? They're ending their session. Despite all that's going on. They're ending their session. The Pennsylvania Republican legislature. It's shocking. Why don't these Republican legislatures step up? What's the problem? And. The Georgia secretary of state, who's a complete loser. Says there is evidence of fraud, Mr. Producer, and he's opening investigation.

What were those? The Pink Panther movies, what was what was his name again? Yes, we have Inspector Clouseau here, that's the secretary of state of Georgia, Inspector Clouseau. T.L. squared too little, too late, and Loffler, who's running for the Senate there, she's exactly right. This guy needs to step down. He's way over his head. Something's not right with this guy. Ladies and gentlemen, you've heard a powerful two hours and we have a powerful additional hour on the way, I hope you'll come back because I know I will.

I'll be right back. From the Westwood One podcast network. Ladies and gentlemen, this final hour of the podcast is sponsored exclusively by the Association of Mature American Citizens, now over two million conservative members Strong EMAC believes in and stands up for the values that we care about faith, family and freedom. Thank you for listening and please support Amen. And you can become a member at Armacost U.S. Join me here.

Now, broadcasting from the underground command post, deep in the bowels of a hidden bunker, somewhere under the brick and steel of a nondescript building, we've once again made contact with our leader, Mark. Hello, America. Mark Levin here, our number eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one.

So today, today, Mr. Peterson wasn't today, I think it was today, The Washington Post did a hit, maybe it was yesterday.

On our friend, Sydney, pal. And as I print it out, it's 14 pages long. That's more information than they did on Hunter Biden, as I recall, Mr. Producer. And the title of the Washington Post piece is for Trump Advocates Sidney Piao Playbook Steeped in Conspiracy Theories. Now, this is a crap newspaper. That was pushing the Russia collusion conspiracy theory for three years, maybe three and a half facts still is. This is a newspaper that prides itself on the worst conspiracy theory in modern American history.

Creating the worst scandal in modern American history. As part of the. Provocateurs. Against the victims. And they had no less than four. Unhinged morons, Aaron Davis, Josh Dossi, Emma Brown and Jon Swaine. Who are writing about Sydney Powell? This is what they do, it's all Solinsky. And it works. It works for the faint of heart. For the spineless. For the crowd that wants to go along to be able to shake their head and their finger at people like you.

You don't have to agree with everything Sidney Powell says, you don't have to agree with everything Mark Levin says, you don't have to agree with everything anybody says. But they're trying to destroy her, smear her. Now, last time I checked. Sydney Power was not a Holocaust denier, and yet during the course of the Holocaust, The Washington Post at its very best. Descent to the Holocaust, along with The New York Times and the rest of the media in this country.

They really shouldn't be pointing fingers at anybody. But here's my question, ladies and gentlemen. Why didn't The Washington Post write an article like this about itself for The New York Times or PB's? Or CBS and NBC or the Canadian Broadcasting System or any of the others. Some of which did very extensive reviews of Dominican voting systems. I have quoted them to you, I played some of them for you. You have four reporters on this story. They couldn't find all that stuff.

October 26, two weeks before the election. PBS did a seven minute story on it, was very concerned about it, you know, the left wing Democrats in Congress including.

Liz. Warren. Including Ron Ron Widen, writing letters to anybody who would listen to them, who would read them concerned about not just Dominion voting systems, but all the computer systems and all the. The big moneyed interests that were funding them and how they could be influenced by domestic and foreign interests. They're not conspiracy kooks, as I say, the media beforehand, they're not conspiracy kooks. But Sidney Powers, a conspiracy cook I got, she brings up Venezuela.

Well, that's how the company got its big push. And she brings up China. Well, you brought up Russia. The Washington Post. Fourteen pages. Alinsky itz. Try and ruin somebody's reputation. Somebody who exposed. A federal judge, Emmet Sullivan, for the fact that he is and was. Somebody who exposed. The inner workings of the FBI and the Department of Justice at the career level. Left wing holdovers that were going after. A hero, retired Lieutenant General Mike Flynn.

Somebody who exposed with more and more documents that came out the inner workings of the Obama Biden White House and what they were doing in a January meeting. But for that conspiracy theorist, Sidney Power, we wouldn't have known most of this. Would we? Well, Aaron Davis, Josh Dorson, Emma Brown and Jon Swain were sitting on their fat asses. Doing nothing. Doing nothing. And so they were given this assignment, no doubt. Freeman, editor.

Go get Sydney, pal. Expose her. Find anything you can destroy her. Well, at the same time, the media are telling us about Joe and Dr. Jill how they're going to get a cat, Mr. Producer, you wear this.

Oh, yes, they're going to be a care bring a cat into the White House. Did you see where Joe Biden actually fractured his foot in a couple of places playing with his dog? I've had four. Probably seven or eight dogs as a kid, my parents had in my lifetime. I'm just saying, how do you fracture your foot playing with a dog? Mr. Producer, you have dogs in your life. Do you ever fracture your foot? Mr.

Call screening of dogs. Never broke a foot either. I understand that you have your wits about you, but then again, he's president and you're not Mr. Producer. Would be president. Thank you. Very good, very good. Anyway. He fractured his foot. And when he was going to the orthopedic, I believe it was the Petoskey, whether the media was kept away. Media had no problem with that. OK, whatever. Now, he didn't fall down the steps.

Now, he didn't trip over himself, and I was the dog, the dog didn't. The dog didn't. No, no conspiracy theories here, please. That we cannot have. Now. The Biden campaign broken foot in all. Tremendous amount of dark money came in. Now what's dark money? Dark money is money that well, we don't know where it came from. Media have no problem with that any more than any problem with Hunter Biden or any problem with the antisemite and the Chinese ties to all these people that Biden would bring in where he president.

It's all perfectly fine. Perfectly fine. Newsmax, though Democrats have long criticized anonymous money and politics, this latest election cycle saw a wave of it flow into and fill up Democrat Party coffers. Crota analysis for the Center for Responsive Politics, for CNN, or believe it or not, more than 320 million in dark money or a third of a billion dollars. Let's put it that way. Boost the Democrats and races for the White House and congressional seats, more than double what Republicans saw.

What all this money come from, none of your damn business. The top of the list, the analysis showed, was Joe Biden, he took a nearly 132 million. An anonymous funding for his bid to unseat President Trump, this whole Biden campaign is sleazy from top to bottom, is it not?

They send the lawyers in the change the laws in the states. They violate Article two of the Constitution, they violate the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. All these ballots flooding in over 90 percent for Biden. Three metropolitan areas, there's a massive increase in voting among minorities, but not in all these other cities. But don't worry, Mark Trump is a disgrace, according to National Review. He's disgraceful, Trump's disgraceful end game. I only read the damn article.

Who cares? They also note the former vice president is a supporter of public finance. Look, look, look, look, Democrats always support stuff for us, not for themselves. Come on, now. Remember what I've told you, this is very, very important and you're going to see this more and more, and in some of these people, he's never Trump and, you know, they don't comprehend this.

And that's fine. They say the glass ceiling in terms of intelligence and rationality. The Democrat Party wants power. It's almost like. These communist parties I've tell you about just understand progressivism is. Is sort of an American style of Marxism, every one of these leading progressives. Whether it's Crowley or Y or Dewey. They were all. To some extent, embraced Marxism. I mean, do we even embrace the Russian Revolution? He just didn't like the violent part.

It's called a revolution dhuey, but anyone? Even when you see Thomas Friedman in 2008, I think it was, and I have a liberty and tyranny, he was. Slobbering all over the Chinese governmental system. He's a nut, but he gets Pulitzer Prizes for being in that, in my humble opinion, of course. I understand the. Freemans are close to the John Roberts family, so I wouldn't want to denounce either of them, of course.

But the Democratic Party, it doesn't push Americanism, it doesn't push individualism, it doesn't push liberty, it doesn't embrace the declaration, it doesn't embrace the Constitution, it's how to fundamentally transform everything.

And it's constantly at war with ancient history. In order to use it against us today, you see. It wants power. So that you have to have allegiance not to your country, not to your flag, not your anthem. Allegiance to the Democrat Party. You see what I mean? The party substitutes. For government, the party substitutes for country. It's all about the party. You also see this in fascistic regimes, by the way. Whether it's Syria or the Third Reich or whatever, and communism, you see it, whether it's Cuba.

Ah, China. And so forth. And so the Democrat Party.

Once allegiance to the Democrat Party, it's why it doesn't give a crap about your history, the flag, the national anthem, the declaration, like, hey, look over here, we're going to take care of you.

We'll decide what rights you get based on your ethnicity, based on identity politics. We'll decide who and how we redistribute to whom and what.

When you think about it, the Democrat Party, its agenda is mostly what? To redistribute what you own and your income. To Democrats. Right, Mr.. They're trying to take from Republicans and give the Democrats. That is, they they have developed a base. That is filled with people who are jealous and angry and demanding. Whether they're college students or whatever it is. And therefore, you're to pay their base. You are to support whether you like it or not, their party and their party's agenda.

Their party's voting system. And you're just supposed to give in to it. I think there's a whole aspect of what's going on in this country, the society, this culture. That some of the former smart conservatives who we all used to quote, are not comprehending. But we do comprehend. The president Trump has comprehended. And has been battling. I'll be right back. Much love in. AMEC, the Association of Major American Citizens, is one of the fastest growing organizations in America now, over two million conservative members strong and I'm one of them, a, who believes in and stands up for the values that we constitutional conservatives care about more than talk.

AMOC fights a full time presence in Washington. EMAC pushes back against reckless spending disasters like Medicare for all and the expanding reach of the federal government and beyond. Advocacy. Joining a map gives you access to a wealth of benefits and discounts, including special member only, rates on car insurance, travel discounts, cell phone plans and a hell of a lot more. And if that's not enough, you'll get Amax bi monthly magazine full of insightful articles on issues that matter to most of us.

We conservatives, as I said, I'm an EMAC member and you should be to join today at Amoco's. That's a m a c dot us stop supporting the liberal agenda that the other 50 plus organization has been pushing for. Join amoc instead. A m a c us.

Let's take a few phone calls, what do you say, let's go all the way there, Juneau, Alaska.

I love watching these Alaska shows these people out there. They'll be the last ones to survive Alaska. My God, Susan, you're on XM Satellite, but you know that. How are you? Oh, I am doing so much better since I get to talk to you. Thank you. Now, Juneau, Alaska. Now, are you in the town or are you one of these people who live out with, you know, without the toilets and everything?

Well, right now I am in Juneau, but I do live on an island that's 40 miles away that you have to go to by water or bodies. So. So, yeah. And we have a small company and and it's really difficult right now. So, you know, with the covid and everything. But I just want you to know that my husband and I have one more from you than we have in our 50 years of marriage. So thank you.

Going to school and everything. And I know what your TV shows have just made. Both of us want to dig into historical.

Let me ask you a question. When you're 40 miles from Juneau, you get cable TV. We get we can get cable TV, but usually we just watch everything we watch on the Internet. I see now basically wait, what do you do? What do you guys do? Well, you won't believe it, but we have a little lumber company and we do a little log cabins and all kinds of things, you know, wood wood products for homes and for remote.

Now, wait a minute. So you actually because I watch these shows, you know, building Alaska, whatever they're called, I am fat. I watch shows where people are doing things I can't do, I don't do.

So I watch these Alaska shows where people are going around buying homes that are self-sufficient.

Is that the sort of home you built? When you sell lumber for yeah, we sell lumber for it and you can actually come up and you can rent one of the state cabins, the Forest Service cabins, for like fifty five dollars a night and the remote. But and they don't have, you know, a kitchen or anything like that.

You know, they have no bathroom, kitchen, any McDonald's around the and in Juneau there is that's 40 miles away. That's 40 miles away. Cost one hundred dollars each way to come in to Juneau. But we bring a lot of wood in to Juneau.

So what's the name of your business there? Was called Icy Strait Lumber, and we also have a little while, we do have a little thing on, it's called Alaskan Outback because we're like seven miles away from our little anyway, it's a long, long story. But anyway, we we we just keep on keeping on anyway, in spite of all I want people to know about you.

So what's the name of the lumber historian?

Well, it's called. I see. I see it. I see why. And then it's stripes, which is S t or a t. S, and that's the body of water that we have to go across to get to Juneau. So icy straits is a body of water. And so we we named our company and they have to go.

But I'm just always intrigued when people call me from Alaska. You take care of yourself, give your husband my best. Thanks for calling. And I wish you a a relatively warm winter, which will never happen. Take care of yourself. We'll be right back. AMEC, the Association of Mature American Citizens, is one of the fastest growing organizations in America now, over two million conservative members strong, and I'm one of them, a man who believes in and stands up for the values that we constitutional conservatives care about more than talk.

AMOC fights a full time presence in Washington. AMOC pushes back against reckless spending disasters like Medicare for all and the expanding reach of the federal government and beyond. Advocacy. Joining a map gives you access to a wealth of benefits and discounts, including special member only, rates on car insurance, travel discounts, cell phone plans and a hell of a lot more. And if that's not enough, you'll get Amax bi monthly magazine full of insightful articles on issues that matter to most of us.

We conservatives, as I said, I'm an iMac member and you should be to join today at Amoco's. That's a m a c dot us stop supporting the liberal agenda that the other 50 plus organization has been pushing for. Join AMOC instead. A m a c U.S..

Mark Levin making conservatism great again. Dial in now eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one.

I want to get to the callers, but listen to this. Nearly one third of New York and New Jersey small businesses reportedly closed in 2020.

One third. Twenty seven point eight percent of small businesses have not reopened in New York, thirty one point two percent have not reopened in New Jersey. That is outrageous. That's sickening. In the family and I, part of the family and I were in New Jersey over Thanksgiving, left here Wednesday and came back Sunday, late afternoon, because when the government tells me I can't do that, I do it anyway. There's a wonderful little deli on Route 17 up there called Harolds, it's closed.

Closed. Wonderful little supermarket, I guess, grocery store called Fairway's. It's close. There's a little bagel shop I used to go to. InFocus. There was owned by a couple of guys, really, really nice guys. They were forced to cut their business the size of their store in half and then they were forced to sell it. And I can go on and on and on what's happening to small businesses in this country. And you've got mayors and governors who have no relationship, no experience with small businesses or any businesses except shaking them down for donations and votes.

People who don't come out of this kind of an environment. And so they willy nilly shut things down and shut people down. I understand that. The incidents of covid are significantly increasing, despite the fact people are wearing masks and socially distancing and following, quote unquote the rules.

So obviously, the rules aren't working. But the mortality rate is miniscule except among the elderly and those who have. Morbidities. And so what's going on now is just atrocious, and we've been talking about the teachers unions and what they've been doing to the schools about every two or three weeks. And so there's a peace now in The Daily Caller by Adam Barnes, America's biggest teachers union shakedowns. Big unions are shaking down school districts if they want the work, the teachers, to go back to work.

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said. Prior to school openings, that no action was off the table when it came to the safety of students and teachers, the head of the NEA. Lily Garcia reinforced that view, studies suggests schools are not the once feared super spreaders.

We know the studies. Out of more than 200000 students and 63000 staff tested, a study by Brown University found an infection rate among staff at point to four percent to a quarter of one percent. And point one, three percent among students. That's an infection rate. Not mortality rate. Forty percent of America's students are taking classes exclusively online. USA Today reported United Teachers L.A. made a list of demands in July. You may recall. To defend the police department, among them, to close charter schools, their competition.

Bastards. And it's hurting the kids, it's hurting them socially, it's hurting them psychologically, it's setting them way back on their grades. There's a big study just done in the biggest school district in Virginia, Fairfax County. Over 80 percent of the students failed. Basic tests. The teachers union. Joe Biden and the teachers union. Our schools now exist and property taxes now exist, not for the students, but the teachers union, our school boards for the most part.

Are owned by the teachers unions. They're out of control. I told you the story about Loudon County, Virginia. Well, they wanted a major salary increase, but they hadn't even shown up for school last year. Paid your salary increase. I mean, what's happening now, people can afford private schools, particularly religious schools. That's exactly what they're opting out for.

But I've also said there needs to be a response to this. And the next time. Your local mayor or town council or commissioners or supervisors or whatever the hell they are, they want a big property tax increase. You go in there and you protest. Schools were supposed to be controlled by the local community and the people who live in the local community now that controlled by these massive public sector unions.

Based in New York and Washington, again, appendages of the Democrat Party. And all you mothers out there who voted for Joe Biden, he said, you know what? No competition. No competition, he's not going to allow it. He'll do everything you can to kill it. Unbelievable. Let's take some calls here. Let's go to Laurie, Ringo's New Jersey, I don't I'm not familiar with Ringo's New Jersey, the great tea that I'm familiar with.

Go right ahead in Philadelphia. Hi, Mark. It's a privilege. It's a privilege to speak with you.

Thank you. I thought on election night that Ohio was the bellwether, it went for Trump.

It was what they said. Ohio would be the. Look, all you have to do is look at a map and know a little bit about the Rust Belt and, you know, Ohio has so much in common with Pennsylvania and I'm sure with Michigan, too, because you have their contiguous if you look at the lot of big old Rust Belt cities, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Toledo, OK, a lot of the same economic issues and economic opportunities in terms of energy, etc.

And yet things went went awry at two o'clock in the morning. And coming from my family was all from Philadelphia. My grandfather used to ride his bike to be a metal lathe operator across the city every morning. They've been out there for 70 years. Do people have any idea how dirty that city is? They can't even. I mean, the Republican Party, they're really basically doesn't exist. They can't they can't put up a serious mayoral candidate or challenge.

I have a daughter who worked her buns off to get to a great school, top of the line school. It's in Philadelphia. It's it's President Trump's alma mater. And she's taking biochemistry down there.

And when I drop her off, there is a postal system garage at 31st Street in Chestnut, right near 30th Street Station, the train station. It is full of postal trucks just sitting there. I firmly believe you can call me a conspiracy theorist. That Democratic machine is so dirty there they harvest it ballots because of the mail out, automatic mail out ballot process. They fill them out. So you don't understand.

The head of cyber security in the country fired by Trump said this was the cleanest election in American history.

He said it like three or four days after the election because he would know, of course, they don't know how dirty what an idiot they are. And one other thing, yes, it's it's all about power. That's all that matters to the Dems. You said it earlier. You're exactly right. There's no integrity. They will do anything. And we're not dumb. I'm educated. They think Trump supporters are are stupid. I want to say I'm educated in a hoity toity way.

I'm a common sense person. I you know, I believe in my senses here.

All right, my friend. I believe in your senses to. Let's go to Mike in New York City, the great WIBC Mike go. Oh, I want to thank you. All right. Yeah, I think the biggest reason why they stopped the voting ballots was basically to chase the observers home. They didn't want them there because they knew the truck loads of ballots were going to come in. And you know why you're right about that?

Because it turns out they didn't stop counting. They said, let's take a break to morning, which was weird. And then in Philadelphia, I mean, they had to go all the way to the Supreme Court.

And the Supreme Court said, look, the law says he can be in the building. It doesn't say how far away. And I'll think about that for a second. You're an observer.

The law says you can be in the building, but it doesn't say how far away you're sitting as a court inequity. What you should say is, yeah, they ought to be close enough so they can watch the ballot. That's the whole point of the law. Yeah, but it's important to point out in court that they chased them away by saying that when it counts, the ballots stop counting the ballots, which they never did. They have more truck loads of ballots coming and they didn't want the observers there except for those three that that stay there.

That's how they knew what was going on. But their main issue was to chase them away. So that's why they said they're going to stop counting the ballots. It's important that we bring that out in court to that was brought out in court.

Yeah, yeah, I know why the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is corrupt. Yes. All right, my friend Mike, thank you for your call, sir. We'll be right back.

Much love in. AMEC, the Association of Mature American Citizens, is one of the fastest growing organizations in America now, over two million conservative members strong, and I'm one of them, a man who believes in and stands up for the values that we constitutional conservatives care about more than talk. AMOC fights a full time presence in Washington. AMOC pushes back against reckless spending disasters like Medicare for all and the expanding reach of the federal government and beyond. Advocacy.

Joining a map gives you access to a wealth of benefits and discounts, including special member only, rates on car insurance, travel discounts, cell phone plans and a hell of a lot more. And if that's not enough, you'll get Amax bi monthly magazine full of insightful articles on issues that matter to most of us. We conservatives, as I said, I'm an EMAC member and you should be to join today at Amoco's. That's a m a c dot us stop supporting the liberal agenda that the other 50 plus organization has been pushing for.

Join amoc instead. A m a c us.

You'll be glad to know that Nike and Apple and Coca-Cola are lobbying against. Zhejiang forced labor bill. Among the major companies and business groups lobbying Congress to weaken a bill that would ban imported goods made with forced labor in China's Xinjiang region.

Is anybody else, LeBron James, to comment, Mr.. How about the head of the NBA? Anybody ask him, how about sportscasters among all around America? Now, these Muslims, these villagers are being slaughtered, they're being raped, they're being sterilized, there's forced abortions, they're slave labor. You know, people want to talk about what happened in this country a long time ago, which was horrible. Things like this are going on in this and in this world today.

In parts of China, in parts of Africa and parts of the Middle East and parts of. South of the border. Now we're talking about sneakers and soda and computers. And they're lobbying Congress. To weaken the Ugur Forced Labor Prevention Act, now, there are things that can be done today. There are things that can be done today, we don't need a 16 19 project, we need a 20 20 project. So where are all the voices that speak out against slavery?

This is modern day slavery and genocide. And it's not the only place where it's occurring and I don't see all these extraordinarily wealthy, I'll take a knee and all the rest of them go to these parts of the world protesting these parts of the world, I see them making money off of communist China. It's sickening. It's like making money off the Third Reich. It really is sickening. Maybe we need a movement, Mr. Badass or Younger's Lives matter.

Let's see that painted on basketball courts. And shirts. And all the moralizing that goes on, what about it? What do you say? And worse care, where these Muslim organizations, they're nowhere, nowhere, nowhere. Unbelievable, Nike, Coca-Cola, Apple, other business groups. The Ugur Forced Labor Prevention Act. I want to hear from the NBA and the NFL, I want to hear from LeBron James and Steph Curry, whatever the hell his name is.

Or that guy, Potemkin Village there in San Antonio, what's his name? I don't like that guy. It doesn't matter. I want to hear from ESPN, I want to hear from all. Condemning. Condemning them. By the way, update. PJ Media, Dyken, John Hopkins studies saying covid-19 is relatively no effect on deaths. In the United States was spiked after publication, writes Matt Margolis. Genevieve Brione, assistant program director of the Applied Economic Masters Degree Program at Johns Hopkins University.

She's been critically analyze the impact that covid-19 had on U.S. deaths. According to her, the impact on the deaths in the U.S. can be fully understood by comparing it to the number of total deaths in the country. It's minimal. Every life matters, we don't need to hear from liberals who support abortion on demand. But every life matters. So what happened to publication was despite because you see it's science, we can't really have science, whether it's the classroom or anything else.

We salute our armed forces, police officers, firefighters and emergency personnel. And I hope to see you right back here tomorrow. Ladies and gentlemen, God bless you. See you then. From the Westwood One podcast network.