On Wednesday’s Mark Levin Show, The anti-democratic, unconstitutional proposal known as the For The People Act (House Resolution 1/Senate Resolution 1), which will change elections for generations, is being pushed in a Senate Committee. Sen. Chuck Schumer is likening any opposition to the bill as efforts that are akin to the Jim Crow laws. To his credit, Sen Mitch McConnell is fighting this. This bill seizes power from states and eliminates election safeguards like accurate registration lists, eliminating precincts, and no longer requiring citizenship to vote, all to ensure that absolutely anyone can vote – even if they’re not supposed to. This destroys one’s franchise because illegal votes cancel out legitimately cast votes. The Democrat lies of Jim Crow comparisons will destroy the American electoral system. Then, Sen. Mike Lee joins the show to discuss the HR-1 bill which is a perpetual political domination by the Democrat Party. Lee calls the proposed law the Illegal Voting Act and likened it to the 100-year reign of one political party in neighboring Mexico due to similar political gamesmanship in the previous century. Lee contends that HR-1 can be stopped and explains what’s on the line. Later, Biden’s insatiable quest to become the biggest neo-Marxist President with aims to outdo FDR and Barack Obama is a raw thirst for his own legacy. Democrats are using a web of non-profit political groups to slowly destroy the filibuster and so much of our country by painting everything they can as ‘racist.’
THIS IS FROM:
Washington Free Beacon
Dark Money Fuels Push to Ditch Filibuster
Washington Post
Social justice for toddlers: These new books and programs start the conversation early
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Image used with permission of Getty Images / Caroline Brehman
Rough transcript of Hour 1
Hour 1 Segment 1
While it’s here now. H.R. one, the bill that would forever change our election system and to insure Democrats, as far as the eye can see, would win the presidency. The Senate and House races. Is now being pushed through a Senate committee. Chaired by Amy Klobuchar. Oh, she’s a moderate. No, she’s a nut. And we will have Mike Lee on the program in about 10 or 15 minutes to discuss with us, but Chuck Schumer is out there and to his credit, Mitch McConnell is fighting this with every with every option that he has. Schumer is out there calling this akin to Jim Crow. Jim Crow. That what George is doing is racist and what these other states are doing or pulling back on the vote to try and prevent minorities from voting, let me tell you what’s going on here. What is so appalling about this is Chuck Schumer is a pathological psycho case, a liar, he’s also a gutless buffoon. I started out on radio in New York, and he has never agreed to come on this program. I want to remind all of you. Quickly about what’s in this bill, and you tell me if this reminds you of Jim Crow, which had as its purpose to prevent black people from voting with literacy tests and poll taxes and so forth, here’s what it would do. It would seize the authority from the states under our Constitution. And compel the states to provide for early voting with specific days and times, automatic voter registration, same day registration, online voter registration, no fault absentee balloting, that has nothing to do with minorities. That has everything to do with breaking down all the security that exists to ensure that the people who register are supposed to register. It is a corrupt political party keeps throwing around Jim Crow here we have the party of Jim Crow now using Jim Crow to destroy our election system. The franchise, and that means when people vote who are not supposed to vote, that takes your vote away. Whether you’re black, brown, red, yellow, white doesn’t matter. But because we have a corrupt media that go along with this, they want to expose what Schumer and Pelosi and the Democrats are trying to do, instead, they give voice. To these lines about Jim Crow. It makes it easier to commit fraud, why same day registration? Election officials have no time to verify the accuracy of people who are voting so somebody could show up at five different polling precincts, register and vote. Yes, they will degrade the accuracy of registration lists by requiring states to automatically register all individuals, not citizens, all individuals from state and federal databases, the Department of Motor Vehicles home, nothing will go wrong with that. The Departments of Corrections and welfare offices, federal departments like the Department of Labor, the Federal Bureau of Prisons and so forth. So a large number of ineligible voters. We’ll be registering to vote, including aliens. Multiple duplicate registrations of the same individuals that are put in federal agency databases more than one time. Constitutes a recipe for massive voter registration fraud by hackers and cyber criminals through online voting registration. We already know the communist Chinese, the fascistic Russians, the Islama Nazis in Tehran and all the rest of them. Are committing acts of cyber warfare against us. Just imagine. It requires states to allow states, citizens to vote in other precincts, not their own precinct, overriding the precinct system. So you can see they’re going down point after point after point, destroying the structure of the election system, destroying it, and then they claim it’s Jim Crow and we don’t want everybody to vote. Who’s supposed to vote these lousy good-for-nothing demagogues like Schumer. And the media sit there. Mandate no fault, absentee ballots, which are the tool of choice for voter thieves. It bans witness signatures, are notarization requirements for absentee ballots. It forces states to accept absentee ballots received up to 10 days after the election. It allows states excuse me, require states to allow vote trafficking, that’s vote harvesting, so any third parties, including campaign staffers and political consultants. Can pick up and deliver absentee ballots. It prevents election officials from checking the eligibility and qualifications of voters and removing ineligible voters. This includes restrictions on using the U.S. Postal Service’s national change of address system to verify the addresses of registered voters participating in state programs that compare voter registration lists to detect individuals registered in multiple, multiple states. That would now be unlawful. Or ever removing registrants due to a failure to vote, no matter how much time has elapsed, so dead people are going to be on the lists, people will be on the lists who’ve moved, people will be on multiple lists, and you’re not allowed to remove them from the list. Makes it almost impossible for nonpartisan organizations to verify the accuracy of registration rolls. What does this have to do with Jim Crow or African-Americans? Absolutely nothing. That damn corrupt Democrat Party once again using minorities as a fig leaf. They grab control. It will reduce the number of Federal Election Commission members from six to five because they want three out of the five so they can control the outcome. It requires states to restore the ability of felons to vote the moment they’re out of prison, regardless of uncompleted parole, probation or restitution requirements. It transfers the right to draw congressional districts from state legislatures to commissions, which the Democrats and their babies would ultimately control, a.k.a. their surrogates in academia. And it would make it a violation of federal law to engage in partisan redistricting and mandate the inclusion of the alien population, both legal and illegal, in all redistricting. This is an anti-democratic, unconstitutional measure. Nothing to do with Jim Crow. It limits access to federal courts for anyone challenging the law. The bill would prohibit the filing of any lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the statute anywhere except in the district court for the District of Columbia and would allow the court to order all plaintiffs and interveners regardless of their number. That is, in all 50 states, quote, to file joint papers should be represented by a single attorney at oral argument. In other words, what they want to make sure is they control even the judicial outcome, the adjudication. They bring it into one of the most liberal courts in the country. In Washington, D.C., you can’t sue with a violation actually occurs that you believe it occurs. Unbelievable. And then listen to this finally. They establish a commission to protect democratic institutions, quote unquote, that would threaten the independence of the judiciary, it defines democratic institutions as those that are essential to ensuring an independent judiciary, free and fair elections and the rule of law. The commission will be given the authority to compel judges. OK, Virginia, today, abolish the death penalty. Virginia today abolished the death penalty. Anyway, judges would be forced to appear before these commissions to justify and testify about their legal decisions. Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Saddam Hussein, you name it. This would be a bill that was written by them to give a patina of voting and democracy when in fact the outcome is assured. Without any legal recourse whatsoever, the outcome is assured, the outcome of the presidential election, the vice presidential election, the outcome of Senate races and congressional races, the fix will be in. And anybody who challenges it, you see, is said to be for Jim Crow and they must be racist. That’s Chuck Schumer. Anybody who stands up to this tyranny, anybody who rejects this totalitarianism, anybody who wants to defend the constitution, federalism, individual liberty, property rights is a white supremacist. Except, of course, the lily white liberals who are doing this to our country, Biden, Schumer and Pelosi, they’re not white supremacists. No, no, no, no. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 2
This is the right place at the right time to have Mike Lee on the program. Senator Lee, how are you, sir? Doing great, thank you very much. Well, Senator Lee, the Constitution was set up so things wouldn’t happen so fast. So there’ll be a deliberative process, particularly in the Senate. We have a legislative process, divided government and that legislative process that people could lobby the representatives, the media, if it wasn’t corrupt, would have an opportunity to review what was taking place and whether it was pro or anti Americanism. All that’s broken down right now with Joe Biden. Joe Biden is desperately seeking a legacy. It’s basically said so in this Vox publication. He wants to be bigger and better than FDR and Obama and LBJ. And now we have this H.R. one bill, plus their effort to scuttle the filibuster. What would happen if they scuttle the filibuster and they get this H.R. one, which would literally destroy state control over the elections and abandon virtually every safeguard we have in our electoral system? The result would be perpetual institutional domination by the Democratic Party, and I don’t use that prediction lightly. It is exactly what would happen. Look at what happened in the previous century in Mexico with the Revolutionary Institutional Party, known as the PRI. They dominated every election, every presidential race for the better part of a century. Nobody else could touch them. That’s what H.R. one would do. I call H.R. one the Illegal Voting Act, because that’s what it would perpetuate and it would make it easier for. Democrats get elected to make it impossible for Republicans to control the House or the Senate or the White House for the next several decades. Chuck Schumer is truly Rollie’s truly out of control with his agenda, the things that he says. So this is a man that threatened the Supreme Court. No consequences for whatsoever. I believe he that threat has had an impact on the court the way FDR s threat did. He talks about eliminating the filibuster rule. But today he goes on about how opposing this outrageous power grab by the Democrat Party that doesn’t help the country. It helps the Democrat Party that it’s like Jim Crow. Are there no limits to the propaganda and the demagoguery that that Schumer and some of these other Democrats won’t entertain now? You know, I would think that there would be some limit to what they would be willing to exploit. And sadly, they’re willing to cheapen some of the most painful memories in American history and try to apply them to basically everything that they like. The problem with that, I mean, there are many problems with that, including the fact that it’s a false comparison, including the fact that it just is, you know, when everyone’s family No one is when everything is that nothing is it’s hard to take them seriously on anything when they make absurd claims like this. You know, I was really upset when Barack Obama gave a speech a few months ago in which he referred to the filibuster and compared it to Jim Crow. America is absolutely absurd, especially because he himself as a senator relied on the filibuster. It’s hypocritical and it’s utterly at odds with history. And it actually goes back to ancient Rome. I mean, they have no knowledge of this, but they they know that they’re not going to be fact checked. They know that the media has their back. Frances’s H.R. one is filled with so many corrupt practices. And if we had an honest media, you’d be seeing it on graphs, on charts. They’d be going through it. They’d be questioning the Democrat Party about what they’re actually doing here. This doesn’t expand the legal vote and the idea that they’re going to hide behind minorities, why they proposed the destruction of our franchise that includes destruction of the franchise for minorities is so appalling to me what they’re trying to do here. Is there any way to stop them? There is a way to stop them. It’s going to happen if and only if no one Republicans in the Senate continue to stand up and push back hard and no to the American people are able to see, notwithstanding the best efforts, the worst efforts of the mainstream news media. We’re doing everything they can to bury the story or alternatively, to cloak it in the false garb of of a civil rights effort, which it is not. Make no mistake, Mark, this thing is nothing short of a political power grab. I mean, these guys, they want to federalize all election law, making it impossible and illegal for any state to purge from its voter rolls voters who are either dead or who have moved out of the state. They want to make it illegal for states to require voter ID. They want to politicize the commission that looks into federal elections. It does guaranteeing their own longevity in office and their own dominance of both houses of Congress. This is wrong on so, so many levels and it is unconstitutional in a number of ways. Senator, I don’t mean to impose on you if you need to go. I understand. Are you able to hold till after the break? Yes, sure. Of course. All right. We’ll be right back with constitutionalist. Really brilliant lawyer. Excellent Senator Mike Lee. We’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 3
You know, Senator Mike Lee, there’s not a lot of politicians. I can have the kind of discussion in the next few minutes I want to have with you. But you I can. And it’s this. The Constitution has constructed firewalls to prevent a temporary majority or temporary faction, as they talked about in the Federalist Papers, from seizing authority and driving the agenda. To me, we have two things going on here, Senator. I’d be interested in your input. We look at the executive branch and we have a president who is signing executive orders as if there are laws. He talks about issuing executive orders on the Second Amendment in other aspects of our constitutional system. And so I look at that and I say, OK, we have autocracy and we have people cheering and celebrating the autocracy. If they can get the ends that they want, regardless of the means. And I look. At the body you served in, actually, the whole Congress, the bicameral Congress and I see the opposite, I see mobocracy, I don’t see many committee hearings. I see fences with razor wire at the top, preventing the people from even meeting with their senators or their members. I see the House of Representatives still having this system in place where one Democrat can vote for 20 Democrats. And then you see a 50/50 split in the Senate where they’re trying to ram through legislation, violating the Reconciliation Act and doing whatever they need to do, including targeting federalism and the electoral system. So these are the two things the framers of the Constitution feared the most, right. Mobocracy and centralized autocracy. Our system is really being torn, the fabric is being torn, it might hold up, it might not hold up. I don’t want to be a Pollyanna about this. I want to be honest with the audience. But we are really at a turning point, aren’t we? Oh, without question. Look, the whole point of the Constitution was to protect the people from the dangerous accumulation of power in the hands of the few. That’s the whole purpose. And all of the protections in it are backstopped by the twin structural protections, the vertical protection of federalism and the horizontal protection of separation of powers. Without those, we’ve got nothing but a dangerous trend over the last 85 years, under the failed leadership of houses, of representatives of Senate and White Houses, of every conceivable partisan combination to consolidate power first within the federal government and then second within the executive branch. And then you’ve got people in Congress, unfortunately, of both political parties who have over time have fed into this, even while complaining sometimes about executive orders in the process, even while enabling them and facilitating them while pretending to fight. They’re actually facilitating the very kind of action they want. And it really has reached a critical point in our history where we’ve got to reverse it or it’s going to be too late. And when I see her senator, as I observe it and I’ve talked to my audience, magnificent patriots and Americans, millions of them, is something that’s really quite unconscionable. The Democrat Party puts the Democrat Party, in my view. Not yours, necessarily above the country, in other words, when you look in these various regimes, whether it’s China and so forth, the party comes first, the loyalty to the party, the power, the party, the party is the country. And I believe that many in the left, in this country, whether I look at Sanders or AOC or the rest of them, they are of the same mindset, which is why they want to rigged the system so they can’t lose and relentlessly impose their will on every aspect of this society. And they cannot do it if they’re if they’re honoring and faithful to the Constitution and our founding. So they trashed the founding. They trashed the founders with all kinds of critical race theories and other critical theories that have a Marxist foundational basis to them. And now we have all this talk about destroying the limits. And if you don’t support them, obviously you’re part of a white dominated society or some other bogus argument that they make. So my proposition to you, as the Democrat Party puts the Democrat Party first, am I wrong? Yes. No, no, you’re exactly right. And although both parties have engaged in their own dalliances away from the Constitution, for the Democrats, this appears to be a feature, not a bug. In other words, at least the Republican Party purports to espouse as a virtue the idea of decentralization. Not every Republican which stands for that, but we at least aim for that because I read the Democratic Party agenda today. It’s all about centralization. It’s all about consolidating power. And it’s not consolidating power for the American family or for communities or for states relative to the federal government. It’s about moving power to Washington and then consolidating it from there into the executive branch. And you know, Senator, further to this point, the Supreme Court really did help pave the way to this during the New Deal. It did reverse course after it was threatened with a with a packed court by FDR. And by the way, the big difference there was the Democrat Party rose up and objected to FDR, and that’s certainly not going to be the case now. And over and over again, this court has expanded the authority of the federal government, the bureaucracy, whether it’s the EPA case of decades ago, Massachusetts versus EPA and on and on and on. And even this time around, without getting into all the electoral discussion about the machines and the rest, when you look at Article two, Section one, clause two, that gives the authority to the state legislatures, not the governors, not the secretaries of states, not some board of elections, and not even to the courts to decide what the electoral process will be. They wouldn’t even take up that case, even though it was clear. That Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch all wanted to take it up and said, we need to resolve this, they’re not really helping us there, their position of passivity is allowing this thing to grow. Don’t you think? Without without question, yes. And I’m looking at my bookshelf, my my bookshelf in my office right now. I’m looking at two of your books right now, Men in Black and also Liberty and Tyranny. You cover different aspects of these topics in both of those books quite well. But yeah, you can trace it back to different dates. I trace a lot of the problem back to April 12, 1937, the day that a different Justice Roberts, Justice Owen Roberts, decided to switch his vote, decided to defer to Congress’s grand ambitions to regulate purely local, albeit economic activity federally. He switched his vote, ostensibly in order to save the nine member Supreme Court. I’m sure he convinced himself he did the right thing. In fact, wasn’t the line to switch in time saves nine, right? Yes. Yes, that that was that was the whole line. But in fact, what he did was obliterate the fundamental regulatory distinction between state power and federal power. And we’ve been paying for it ever since then. And so now we have a piece here and we’ve talked about this on my program with the audience here, that Joe Biden I’m convinced that Joe Biden wants to be bigger than FDR, LBJ and Obama. I’ve said this man is he is hell bent and obsessed on a legacy. He may not be totally with it, but he’s with it when it comes to himself. He’s always been narcissistic and very, very nasty. You can ask people who came before the Judiciary Committee when he was chairman. And here it is. There’s a piece in Vox, which is a very liberal site, and he’s talking to historians and he’s bragging about how he wants to be bigger than FDR and LBJ and how he really wants to outdo Obama. This is craziness, isn’t it? Yeah, it is. It is crazy. And it’s something that really should be wildly unpopular in America. The minute someone starts speaking that way as president of the United States, we should start looking somewhere else. We should start saying, OK, we’ve got a serious problem here and Congress should be standing up and saying or we’re not going to go in this direction. Those kinds of grand ambitions are completely anathema to the cause of constitutional government. It’s not just that they can lead to tyranny. They are tyranny in and of themselves, as the whole darn part of the Constitution is to avoid making this about any one person, especially the president of the United States. And so he’s meeting with historians who are actually, you know, cherrypicked, encouraging him to he wants to go big and he wants to go bigger. You know, that that so-called phony infrastructure bill that’s going to be like 80, 90 percent non infrastructure, just like that so-called coronavirus relief bill was mostly. An unrelated to relief, they keep talking about how he wants to go bigger and bigger, and now the three the three trillion grew to four trillion and now they’re talking about potentially five trillion dollars plus senator. It’s this they’re going to bankrupt future generations for all time, white and Democratic members of Congress in both houses are already talking left and right about how supportive they are of this, and yet they don’t even know what’s in it. They haven’t even agreed among and between themselves how much it’s going to cost. Which begs the question, what exactly are they committing to? Is it a principle? Is it a plan? Or is it just a person I think is a person. And that scares me to death. It should be frightening to all of us. Look, there is a big problem when you’ve got this much money being spent by one government, especially a government that’s already accumulated 30 trillion dollars worth of debt. This is completely unsustainable and it’s going to endure ultimately to the detriment of America’s poor middle class. They say in this article is for things going for him. Congress, his party activists pushing him strong, gathering economic winds at his back. And he’s popular in the polls. And what does that have to do, a constitutional government? Well, it’s how they like to see the world and what they don’t mention. There is something you alluded to briefly earlier, which is a completely compliant media, one that will spin any narrative his way, one that issues any kind of intellectual curiosity insofar as it might reflect poorly on any of his objectives. And one that has, at least since 1964, been emboldened by a dastardly precedent in New York Times versus Sullivan that that basically gave the press, the liberal press, an excuse to run roughshod over the truth as long as they’re talking about a politician or more often than not, a Republican politician. There’s a great dissenting opinion issued by the D.C. Circuit Judge, Judge Silberman, over the weekend. Commend all of your listeners, who, by the way, are all patriots. They really are. And we did talk about it. But I’d like your take on it now. I thought his dissent was masterful. His whole point was, look, there is not a darn thing in the Constitution, not a single syllable in the First Amendment, but talks about defamation law that is a creature of state law, not federal law, and certainly not in the Constitution. And yet the Supreme Court decided in 1964 and oh, we think because of the First Amendment, we’re going to see that you can defame someone and get away with it as long as they’re a public official, usually a Republican public official, and as long as they didn’t act with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth is completely sloppy jurisprudence. And it’s set up to do exactly what it has done, which is to give the media that much more of a monopoly toward propagating leftist ideology as well as desperate as these times are. I always enjoy having these conversations with you and maybe we ought to do it a little bit more often. Maybe as a routine matter, I think I would love nothing more. That would be fantastic. Well, we’re going to figure that out, Senator Lee. All right. God bless you. And have a good evening, my friend. Thanks so much. More to give you to. And I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 4
You know, Senator Lee was kind enough to mention he’s looking at his bookshelves and there’s men in Black, which was actually my first book, and then Liberty and Tyranny, which was actually my third book. And they do, in a very concise and basic way, lay out the situation. And over the years, I’ve written books that are. I would say a little more scholarly in many respects and. But lay it out in a way that all of us can understand. There is a war going on in this country, of course, if I mention it, I’m inciting. If the Democrats mention it and thrown Adolf Hitler to boot, of course, there are not inciting their insightful. But this is a massive attempt by the Democrat Party to grab power, to change America and to forever institutionalize. Their ideological ideology. Now, what do you call that? I call it disaster. And if you live in Joe Manchin state or if you live in Cinema State, that would be West Virginia and Arizona respectively, you best get on the phone as fast as you can and make it abundantly clear to these two senators. They have no tolerance for tyranny. Do it with politeness, to it with civility, but make it clear. You have no tolerance for the Democrat Party trying to destroy this country and steal election after election. And that you have every intention of not just voting against them, but actively campaigning against them. In every way possible. This is not election reform, it has nothing to do with Jim Crow, it has nothing to do with black voters, has everything to do with these lily white left wing Democrats out of San Francisco, out of Manhattan and out of Wilmington, Delaware, who want to take over this country from the rest of us. They don’t want to play fair. They don’t want to compete fairly. It’s not about ideas. It’s about crushing ideas and crushing competition and crushing opposition. That is simply unacceptable. As the corrupt media sit there on their fat asses. And just watch it with glee, where the hell is Chuck Todd, that clown, and George Stephanopoulos, they’re rooting for the Democrats. They’re frauds, their families, their friends, their social circle. They’re all Democrats. Where’s Adam Kinzinger, where’s the great Adam Kinzinger today? And look at this, this fraud, Jake Tapper, who the other day went on and compared it to Jim Crow. What a jackass. Yes, he’s a Democrat and he worked for Democrats and he weasels his way into the media. That’s how it works, as I wrote about it on freedom of the press. The evidence is. Is unequivocal. So that’s what we’re facing. I want to congratulate the Democrats, they’ve devoured our universities, they devoured our media. They devoured our culture and entertainment. Now they want to devour our liberty. That Declaration of Independence says certain things that it means certain things are unalienable. Rights are not up for them to steal. All right. Stick with us, folks. This isn’t your typical show where we just read off Web sites and give opinions. We go a little bit deeper. Stick with us. That’s why we’ve been here almost 20 years. I’ll be right back..