On Thursday’s Mark Levin Show, This program has been focused on what the democrats are doing with immigration and other critical issues for nearly two decades. Sixteen years ago the book “Men In Black” thoroughly explained how left-wing politics had eroded the Supreme Court. Now, Democrats have followed Chuck Schumer’s lead to continue threatening the Court by expanding it to weaken it so that activist Justices can legislate from the bench. This program has always supported term limits for the Supreme Court, however, in the current political environment, it’s being used to manipulate the power of the court not to protect its integrity. Democrats are using every instrumentality they can to move their unpopular agenda forward because they know they could never pass these measures legitimately. Then, James O’ Keefe has been suspended from Twitter permanently. O’Keefe called in to discuss his plans to take legal action against Twitter for trying to silence him following the bombshell video his organization released on CNN’s own admission of propaganda on hidden camera. Afterward, Dan McLaughlin from National Review calls in to discuss how the Democrat Party is wielding power through surrogates in big corporations. Finally, Congressman Lee Zeldin of New York joins the show to announce his campaign for Governor of New York and his plan to put NY back on track to save the state.
THIS IS FROM:
Fox News
James O’Keefe vows to sue Twitter for defamation after ban for alleged use of ‘fake accounts’
Daily Wire
Netflix, Viacom, Amazon, George Clooney Sign Letter Opposing Voter Integrity Laws
NRO
The Party in Power Is Directing a Corporate Conspiracy against Its Political Opposition
Epoch Times
Mike Lindell: Costco Has Stopped Selling MyPillow Products
Townhall
White House Falsely Denies Tax Hikes Won’t Increase Utility Bills
Washington Free Beacon
Quincy Institute Fellow Worries ‘Israeli Lobby’ Will Scuttle New Iran Deal
Epoch Times
Republican Senators Want FBI to Investigate Biden’s Key Pentagon Nominee
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Image used with permission of Getty Images / Drew Angerer
Rough transcript of Hour 1
Hour 1 Segment 1
Other broadcasters on TV and radio welcome. Welcome scribes from all over the country. As we begin our program. You know, it’s a funny thing, Mr. Producer, you’ve been with me almost from the beginning, haven’t you? And that’s 2002. Thereabouts, you were with me 2003, I started in 2002. Soon, it’ll be 20 years. You know, for 20 years, even before I was on radio. I was focused on the immigration issue. The immigration issue. We led the effort here and we were the first. Millions of you know, activists to oppose this so-called. Gang of Eight and comprehensive immigration reform, which would have been a disaster. You you live in it, she lit up the boards. On Capitol Hill. You flooded Capitol Hill with emails. And you were successful, it would have been a disaster. These various proposals coming out of the. Washington establishment have been disastrous. But you’ve stopped them. My book, Liberty and Tyranny, which was written about 12 years ago, yeah, 12 years ago. That entire chapter there on immigration. And it’s not the only book in which I raise it. Of course I raise it and plunder and deceit. But we’ve talked at length here at great length. About what the Democrats are doing with immigration. We’ve talked at great length over the years. Particularly the last four and five years. Over how they’re using immigration to turn red states purple and purple states blue. We’ve talked about California many times where Republicans couldn’t lose and now they can’t win, well over 40 percent of the population is now Latino, much of it illegal. And the Latino population votes two thirds of the three fourths Democrat. It’s just the way it is. We’ve talked here many times about the Democrats and the Democrat media talk about Browning America. Wanting to brown America. In order to have an effect on the outcome of the elections. They use the language, not me. We’ve talked about how Barack Obama and Joe Biden. In particular. Have raised this issue. And they do it in the context. Of wanting to change. The demographics and change the citizenry. So we’ve talked about this for almost 20 years, I’ve written about it repeatedly. But apparently some columnists don’t listen to their show and have no idea that I’m on the air, Mr.. How many listeners do we have, 14 million, 15 million. A lot of people don’t understand, you do, ladies and gentlemen. Have talk radio and specifically this program. There more listeners to this program than our viewers of any news cable program, period. That’s why Rush was so massive and Sean is so massive also because of his radio audience. And my magnificent audience, you. And I want to turn to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is another issue on which we’ve led. The very first book I wrote was about the Supreme Court. I think it was like six years ago, actually. Six years ago. When Chuck Schumer threatened two justices on the court, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. August twenty nineteen. We led the charge here that what he had done. Was not only utterly unethical. And it would create potentially violence, incite an insurrection, you might say, against the Supreme Court, he did it on the Supreme Court steps. But I made it clear then and I made it clear repeatedly thereafter. Was to threaten the court. And the justices. So that they would not take cases that he doesn’t like. Her issue, rulings that would offend him. As soon as the idea of packing the court was resurrected, we said exactly the same thing that what they’re trying to do here. I scare the members of the court from doing their jobs. That’s exactly what they’ve been doing, including in this last election when it came to those two Pennsylvania cases and I would add the Texas case as well. These were legitimate federal constitutional cases. The court ducked. Why? Because the Democrats and Schumer had already put the marker out there that they wanted to pack the court. So when they meet in their cloistered chamber, I know, right, no doubt that they talk about this and they think about this and it’s had an impact. So now we have a couple of the more radical members of the Democrat Party, which means most of them. Proposing to add four seats to the United States Supreme Court to go from nine to 13. And they’ll tell you, well, you know, the Constitution doesn’t say we have to have nine, it doesn’t. And the numbers have changed in the past, and they have, but not for this reason. An argument has never been made. Even when the numbers have been adjusted in the past. To change the number of members of Supreme Court justices for the purpose of advancing a political party’s ideology and agenda. That argument has never been made until now. Until now. And so this entire effort is, as I’ve been saying and as I will continue to say, is intended to effect the court. So even if they don’t get what they want and I’m not so sure they may not. They know that what they’re doing is threatening the court without the. Possibility of an ethics complaint filed against them. We’re just talking about the court and filing, you know, legislation and so forth. Because. These people are destroying our constitutional construct, it’s in the way of their. Marxist agenda. Now, I want you to know something and we’ll continue with this and some other issues. It’s a packed program today. Like every day. I want you to know that. I am not taking this sitting down. That I’ve got a couple of projects out of the way. These projects that are underway. Include exposing. Who these leftists are. Changing the way we talk about them, digging into the issues, digging in, who’s behind it, and I understand there’s some columnists out there who do not listen to the show and have no idea what I’m talking about. I’ve never read any of my books. That’s OK. I’ve got millions of you out there. Because we have to change the narrative here. We’ve got to take the battle, the political battle, the constitutional battle, the ideas battle to our enemy, not our adversary. They’re not adversaries. They’re enemies. That’s the way they view us, it’s the way I view them. So with all of this in mind. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 2
Before we proceed with some of the issues I’ve been talking about, I wanted to talk to James O’Keefe about what Twitter just did to him and his organization. Apparently, they banned you permanently. Is that correct, James? That’s right, Mark. Twitter sent me a message today, an email saying that they’ve permanently suspended me for, quote, operating fake accounts. But, Mark, that just isn’t true. I have no fake accounts. This, of course, comes on the heels of the CNN videos released the third today. So this is crazy. I mean, this is beyond George Orwell at this point, essentially. And I I’m going to sue I’m going to be suing Twitter for defamation, filed a complaint and filing it on Monday. And I’m filing a lawsuit against Twitter for saying that I’ve operated fake accounts. Other people have impersonated me. They still remain on Twitter. So I don’t know what is going on. But we’re going to go on offense and make a couple suggestions to you and your litigation. Sure. In addition to defamation, I’m of the opinion that the people who keep saying, well, Twitter’s a private company. I believe when you consider Twitter and Facebook and their ties to this administration and the Democrat Party, I believe they’re surrogates for the Democrat Party and their surrogates for this administration. And I really think you all ought to consider a straight up in addition to defamation First Amendment lawsuit, you can point out how there’s various information and research out there, how they do, in fact, have ties to the Democrat Party with various executives, how they do, in fact, contribute overwhelmingly to the Democrat Party, how they conduct themselves over the course of the last several months in favor of the Democrat Party and against the Republicans and Donald Trump, that this isn’t some fan dance that they can get away with that among other things. I would argue it is, in fact, given their their ties to the government and given their ties to the majority party in the government, that, in fact, this could well be a First Amendment issue. You should talk to your lawyers about that. I will. Thank you for that. And as your audience and you may know, they have protection under the so-called Section 230 immunity. But, you know, it doesn’t protect them acting in willful disregard for the truth and lying about a public figure such as myself. You can’t do that under the law. I can prove that here. I will get discovery into Twitter, just like I get discovery into The New York Times and New York Supreme Court, which we won on that motion. And we’re entering discovery and videotaped depositions. We will be filing a complaint against Twitter on Monday. We’re also exploring our options to sue Twitter in other countries. It’s about time we all start suing these people. I agree with the recourse 100 percent. And you know that Section two three zero does not trump the Constitution of the United States. Nothing does, so none of these statutes do and that this isn’t some wild idea, you know, I’ve been involved in a lot of litigation, as a matter of fact. And the other thing, again, you might want to think about and I want to hear this, too, as tortious interference with your. That is it’s important that you get the message out, you have people who watch what you produce, you have people who contribute to you, you’re not a billionaire like the people behind Twitter and so forth. So tortious interference with your your business is, again, a separate court unrelated to that section 230. Just a few ideas out there I wanted to give to you. And this is outrageous. And you should litigate. And you’re right to tell other people, don’t take this lying down. Now, what I’ve done is I move my millions of millions of people off Twitter. I hope they have. And Facebook because I can go to hell. As far as I’m concerned. They’re stealing our data. They’re becoming extremely wealthy from it. They don’t have our permission to use it. And my view is I don’t want to deal with these fools anymore. And so we’re over a parliament, of course, and Rumball. But I think your your principled stand is very, very important. Any final words? Well, Mark, my final word is that we’ve won in New York Supreme Court. I believe one of the few plaintiffs in modern history to get discovery into The New York Times and Securitise is about truth. We are truth CNN that what you saw these tapes this week that they call themselves propaganda and saying they put words in people’s mouths and they’re an adjunct to the Biden campaign, to their words they call they this is a director at CNN and they partner with Twitter and Google and they work with each other. There’s no other option. I never thought I’d have to sue all these people, but that’s unfortunately what I have to do. And a lot of other people are going to follow our footsteps. We’re going to sue them on Monday. Harmeet Dhillon will represent me in that action and we’re going to sue him probably in the country of Brazil. We’re going on offense. We will get discovery. I will depose Jack Dorsey under oath on video and I will prove malice. And you will see those tapes mark my words in the next year. And Veritas tapes of proton mail, dot com for anybody who’s been defamed by these people, because I think we need to create an army of people to go on offense. Now, litigation is not cheap. Do you need support from the audience? I’m yes, I’m a non-profit organization. I don’t have the money to pay this, but I have faith that people will step up and support this. I can’t afford this. This is there’s no commercial imperative. I’m a nonprofit organization by the grace of God and the patriotism of your audience and other audiences. People contribute cost me a quarter million dollars to get past a motion to dismiss The New York Times, but play right now, usually after motion to dismiss, they settle litigation. The impact he could offer me. Ten million dollars. I’m not taking his money. Our mission is about discovery. That’s what this is about. I want to know why they lied about called our videos deceptive disinformation. So they operate fake accounts. That’s a ridiculous claim. I’ve never operated a fake Twitter account in my life. And reckless disregard for the truth is not allowed under the First Amendment. And and even that New York Times versus Sullivan case in 1964, one day may be overturned as a result of all this litigation. You shouldn’t lie about people in this fashion. It’s hurting our republic. It’s not ethical. And the only thing these people respond to is power. They can’t be reasoned with. They can’t be shamed. I release tapes all week on CNN. The guy is calling the whole network propaganda. They want people to die. So the quoted numbers go up and get them better ratings. And Zucker doesn’t say a word. So now I’ve got to sue. And I never thought I’d do it. Mark, I don’t. I don’t I’m not an attorney. I I’m learning. But we have one against The New York Times. All right. Before before I have the heart break, what is the simplest link? Where should people go? Project Veritas Dotcom. You can donate to us there. That’s Project Setara Dotcom, Mr. Badoo. So let’s go ahead and put it on our rumball and our parlor where we have five and a half million followers. Everybody, let’s help out James O’Keefe and his organization. They need it and we need them. Thank you, James, and good luck. We’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 3
But we’ve been speaking to about four of the five Americans who are literate at eight seven seven three eight one three eight one one, these major corporations and I’ll get to them later that are signing on to the Democrat Party agenda, trying to ensure the Republican Party can never win the presidency, the Senate or the House of Representatives ever again, because that’s what this is all about. These state legislatures are trying to put back the status quo before the virus and before the Democrats win in the court and their governors and their secretaries of state and their attorneys general changed the rules to accommodate Joe Biden. And so the Democrat Party is insisting. That Republicans not defend themselves. Now. I want to be clear. We’ll put another marker down. I want to be clear. This is the end of the support for corporations. From conservatives and real Republicans, so in the end, they’ll have no core group of support because those of us who supported corporations in the past supported free market capitalism and competition, these corporations lining up behind the Democrat Party and the ideological left don’t support that. They’re colluding with the most radical elements of the Democrat Party. They’re colluding with Hollywood and they’re lying. They’re joining in on the lies, the serial lies about what’s taking place in these states. And so, as far as I’m concerned, and I hope the people on Capitol Hill are listening, the Republicans, they can go to hell. I don’t care if they tax them to hell. I really don’t. Small businesses, medium businesses that are not getting involved in this fight, they should be protected. They should be segregated out from the rest. There’s no reason to have one policy for all of them. And so what’s going to happen is these boardroom’s and these executives are going to find they’ve no friends because the Democrat Party is out to squeeze them for everything they can get out of them and the Republicans shouldn’t stop them. As I’ve been saying for years, as I said, in liberty and tyranny, we need to use the tactics of the left against the left in order to defend our liberty, in order to defend our country and in order to defend our property. And we can do so by embracing our principles. But we have to get wise strategically and tactically, that’s the key. That’s what I keep talking about. I’ve talked about. Cloward and Piven over and over and over again over the years and have explained these to Marxist professors. A married couple. And they cloud’s gone, Piven is still around. What they talked about, what they wrote about. Solinsky have talked about how I knew nothing about Solinsky. I told you this 19 years ago, but how there were boxes and boxes of his book. Rules for radicals, which I never heard of before, and I’m 22, 23, I walk into this government building in the Reagan administration. And this building. Among other things, it’s the headquarters for the Vista program and the Peace Corps program, and there’s boxes and boxes of these books. And I said, who the hell is this guy? And I read him. I said, Oh, my God. Your tax dollars, your buying paperback copies of this book and you’re selling them into. Our inner cities. They were sending them into our inner cities through the Vista program and other programs. A Marxist revolution. And we’ve talked about the contents of the book, and I’ve included aspects of that book in my various books as well to point it out. We can’t be docile anymore. We can’t be passive anymore, we can’t play defense, they are revolutionaries and we’re sitting around. Trying to defend ourselves are just living our lives that can’t go on anymore. Because they keep picking a fight with us now, the mostly peaceful protesters who are again rioting. In this town outside of Minneapolis, police have now seized three guns at them from them, three guns. No guns were seized. Not one on January 6th. Not one gun. Three guns have been seized. How come Joe Biden doesn’t talk about that, Mr Gun control? Not a word. Not a word from the gun control freaks. Or the fact that Mr. Right. The reason he had an arrest warrant on because he had, among other things, aggravated assault, aggravated robbery, aggravated how hit an unregistered gun, I thought Joe Biden didn’t want unregistered guns on the street. He also choked a woman twice, a woman. And yet he’s he’s the new hero, you got this lawyer, Crump, who is a liar, he gets out there and says, look. He was executed. Now, ladies and gentlemen, you saw that video, was he executed? Now, he resisted arrest. And you can hear on the video she pulled the wrong weapon. What are we supposed to do? Resign ourselves to the writing, resign ourselves to the demagogues, whether they have law degrees or not. It’s preposterous. It’s time to reimage, all right, trying to reimage the criminals, the criminal lawyers. And the court system that allows us to persist. I don’t know what’s going to happen in the case. But the police officer, Trovan. And the Floyd the Floyd George case, George Floyd case, excuse me. But I will tell you this, if there is a set, there are several bases for appeal thanks to this judge in this case. You don’t let relatives on who are crying and telling you about George. That’s not probative of anything. Or witnesses who don’t witness a lot or I don’t know what this judge was thinking. He didn’t sequester the jury. You’ve got a bizarre situation here. I haven’t talked about this much, but just a footnote. Were the individual in the car? The individual in the car. But George Floyd. Apparently, his drug dealer. Has pled the fifth. So I was talking with the next prosecutor buddy of mine, he says that’s easy to get around. The prosecution in the case gives him immunity. Of one form or another, and they can force him to testify, but the prosecution hasn’t done that. Why? Because they don’t want him to testify now. It’s very hard to be able to have due process when prosecutors are doing something like that. Don’t get me wrong. Don’t get me wrong, this will be very tough. For for that former police officer. But the rules are the rules and there’s due process, and that’s why we have judges. Those jurors are watching what’s taking place in the right case. You got to wonder how they can be influenced. Well. So I’ll comment on these things. Because I call him as I see him, whether it’s the court, whether it’s immigration. Whether it’s these various cases. We’ve got conservatives. Who are saying while you see the system works because. Ex Officer Potter was, in fact, charged with second degree manslaughter, not one of them is actually read. The Minnesota code. And that section that applies to second degree manslaughter. That was an utterly bogus charge. Utterly bogus charge. I know this upset some people who see everything through the lens of race. But that language and those elements in that charge don’t match what took place. Not only that, they bring the charge within. 48 hours. So there was no serious investigation that was undertaken. Meanwhile, you’re looking at you look at the Washington, D.C. situation. We’re a police officer. We don’t even know who he is or which. Or which which law enforcement agency employed him? Shot to death, an unarmed protester. We don’t know the circumstance, we don’t know anything and nobody wants to know. No big deal. No big deal. She was a veteran and they try and make her out like a kuhnen cook when she was not. By all accounts, she was a lovely young woman who loved her country and was a patriot. She was utterly unarmed. She didn’t have a warrant out for her arrest. She wasn’t resisting anyone or anything. She wasn’t threatening anybody, she was unarmed. How is it we know absolutely nothing about that case, nothing. And the FBI and the Department of Justice have decided that the officer in the case, whomever he or she is, will not be charged after a thorough investigation. There was no thorough investigation with Officer Potter. No thorough investigation. They couldn’t wait to Chaja. That’s what’s going on in America today. The mob. Now, what’s the greatest threat to the Supreme Court today? What’s the greatest threat to the Supreme Court today? Is that the crowd from January 6th? Now, what is it? It’s the mob inside the Capitol building, they call themselves Democrats. That a number of them. Support a bill. To alter the makeup of the United States Supreme Court. For no other purpose. Don’t affect the outcome of cases. If that’s not Joseph Stalin, Soviet Union, I don’t know what the hell is. I don’t know what it is. What is it that they want to do? Well, they want all power. That’s what. And you heard Ed Markey. Ed Markey should be wearing a uniform for the old Soviet Union. Really, he should. He’d be more comfortable there than he is here. Because Ed Markey said the Republicans stole two of those seats and we’re just trying to fix it. So I would ask his media friends, does that not incite anything? Does that not incite anything when a United States senator gets up and says two Supreme Court seats were stolen? How about in the past when the Democrats got up and say Trump stole the election because he colluded with the Russians, says I didn’t sign anything. We have insurrections going on in this country every night. With Antifa, Black Lives Matter and the common criminals in the streets attacking small business people, many of whom are minorities, attacking police officers, undermining the civil society and authority of all kinds. You’re not hearing a lot of complaints from The New York Times or The Washington Post. Our CNN or MSNBC or CBS, ABC, NBC, not a lot, not like the day in, day out coverage of January 6th. Did the Democrats seem upset about any of this to you, Mr. Producer? America, does a Democrats seem upset by the riots, by the looting, by the arson, by the outrageous accusations? Not one bit. Because there’s some commonality between the Democrat Party and the riders. You see, the rioters are more honest than the Democrat Party, they’re out there. They’re committing crimes. They’re violent. But inside the Capitol building. We have the other. The politicians. Are making war with the Senate. They want to stop the Senate with four more seats. Making war against separation of powers in the United States Supreme Court, they want to control the court, turn it into one of their Politburo’s. They want to destroy the procedures that have been around forever in the United States Senate, so nothing and no one can get in their way, whether it’s 50 50 or not. So who’s doing more damage, actually, to our constitutional system? Who’s doing more damage? As outrageous as the rioters are and they should be rounded up and thrown in jail. And sit there for a long time after their arraignment, we’ll get around to you, pal, when we get around to you. But it’s the Democrats in Congress. Are they a greater threat? To our Constitution. To the independence of our court system. To the sovereignty of our country. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 4
Now, this is all strategic on the court. It’s not like these left wing Democrats misfired and all of a sudden Pelosi pulls it back and then the commissions are independent and so forth. You have this congressman who suggests term limits instead of court packing. Now, I was one of the first in labor in men in black to suggest term limits, and I believe in term limits. But not under these circumstances, because the Democrat Party wants to use term limits in order to pack the court, I don’t believe in that. There needs to be term limits in a neutral environment, so if they start calling me, even Mark Levin says, understand, do I support term limits? Yes, I’ve said it at least three times in seven or eight different books. But not under these circumstances, and the Liberty Amendments was, I think, the most recent time or plunder and deceit where I raised it again, 14 year limits, but I don’t believe in that given Joe Biden and given the Democrat Party and what their motives are. So, no, not right now, not under these circumstances. The Democrat Party is diabolical. It’s that simple, you can see the Democrat Party. Is using every instrumentality of our country, not just the government, but the private sector. In a bum’s rush, I should say, a Marxist rush to take permanent control. Three, H.R. one, and that’s one they want to destroy. Their political opponents. Through immigration, they want to change the nature of the citizenry. And to have more red states turn purple and purple states turn blue, and their focus right now is on Texas. There’s an enormous amount of illegal immigration pouring into the state of Texas. And the states doing everything it can with its limited resources. Remember, they’re not the Border Patrol. To try and deal with it, but federal law preempts and I believe that is exactly what they’re up to, at least that’s my view. And then you look at other aspects of what they’re doing, why do they want to pay 15,000 dollars for illegal aliens in New York? Why do you think why do they want to eliminate 50,000 dollars in student loans? Why do you think they’re buying support? They’re buying votes with your money. They’re trying to expand their base. One of the things they never do is promote individual liberty, unalienable rights, American sovereignty, because they don’t believe in America.