On Thursday’s Mark Levin Show, three more cops were shot, this time in Houston. The number of police shot is breaking records and some incidents involve illegal aliens. Cops are under attack and getting sued for simply doing their jobs. The southern border is not secure, gangs and drugs are getting into the country and innocent lives are paying the price. The Marxist movement is creating this violence. The media hates whatever gets in their way and that’s why they provide cover for the anti-police crowd that they promote on their platforms. Democrats will support rioters, but they won’t support the police. Who is going to hold the media and the Democrat party to account? This program will lead an effort to impeach Joe Biden, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General of the United States over this open border. Then, the question of whether the Vice President can serve as a tie-breaker on a Supreme Court nominee has been asked. This likely won’t happen or even be necessary as the RINO republicans will probably support President Biden’s nomination. A tie-breaker vote is highly questionable in the confirmation of a jurist with a lifetime appointment that the VP’s boss had nominated. Any justice confirmed by the VP’s tie-breaker would likely always be viewed as illegitimate. Later, BLM leaders are nowhere to be found? Critics suggest that this is highly irregular for a non-profit with $60M in its coffers. Co-founder Patrisse Cullors named two successors, but they said they never accepted the job. Only two board members remain and refuse to respond to the media. Afterward, in a bombshell video, a federal contractor is caught on tape saying that the government is betraying its citizens by transporting illegal aliens into NY in the middle of the night.
THIS IS FROM:
Fox News
3 Houston police officers shot, officials say
Washington Examiner
BLM’s millions unaccounted for after leaders quietly jumped ship
Rumble
Fox’s Melugin: ICE Is Releasing Illegals With Criminal Histories Into U.S.
Washington Pundit
Arizona County Intergovernmental Agreements That Open Doors for FEMA Camps Target Conservative Counties
Townhall
DHS Secretary Had a Disastrous Meeting with Border Patrol Agents
NY Post
‘Betraying the American people’: Leaked video reveals Joe Biden’s ‘hush hush’ migrant invasion
Right Scoop
Racism on The View: Joy Behar says Justice Clarence Thomas is a traitor to his race
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Image used with permission of Getty Images / Spencer Platt
Rough transcript of Hour 1
Hour 1 Segment 1
Three more police officers shot in Houston. And you can go online and you can see a security camera footage captured the chase between the police officers and this individual and the number of police officers shot this year is a record. And shot dead, there are, in fact, illegal aliens involved in a number of these shootings, just as there was an illegal alien involved in the synagogue outside of Dallas, Texas. Now, a couple of things here, we must have long memories, folks. It wasn’t that long ago that I had to come behind this microphone day in and day out and defend police officers in this country against lies about systemic racism, against lies, about shooting people of color, blacks in particular, on and on and on it went. And there is now an obvious to those who care trend here. That the Democrat Party and the media. Are destroying this country. They’re destroying the civil society. They’re taking up the case. Of the reprobate, they’re taking up the case of the offender, they’re taking up the case of the illegal alien. They push the narratives, the anti-American narratives. They defend these various American Marxist movements there of these various American Marxist movements. Racism, bigotry, anti-Semitism, you name it. Now, this is very serious. When you have a corrupt media. An intellectually dishonest media. And people who watch TV and there’s a lot of people watching TV, including criminal. And they dehumanize people with whom they disagree or they dehumanize people as targets of the American Marxist movements. They create violence. And violence creates injury and death. We don’t have a systemically racist police for a police entity in this country. There may be individual officers, maybe a police force here and there, but police as a as a rule are not systemically racist. Maybe you were stopped more times and other people in particular areas and so forth, but maybe the statistics bear that out. We’re just not allowed to have that discussion. But more and more people who aren’t victims play the role of the victim. More and more. People who aren’t victims play the role of a victim. Economic victims, law enforcement victims and on and on. The media in this country and I play these people all the time. Has a hadon. And they want to destroy anything that gets in their way, whether it’s Trump and his supporters. Whether it’s law enforcement. Whether it’s conservative talk radio or Fox get in the way in that they don’t just march behind them. Do Chuck Todd and George Stephanopoulos do Joy Reid? And this woman, what is the. I can never remember her name and Tiffany Cross, they take any responsibility for any of this. AOC, she’d take any responsibility for any of this Bush. Cory Booker. No, of course not. How about Kamala Harris and her activist role? In supporting rioters, how about Joe Biden, who doesn’t lift a finger? Does he take any role, does the Democrat Party take any role? Or I should say responsible, the answer is no, and they’re not going to be held to account and they know that. And they don’t care. Who’s going to hold the media to account? Who? Who’s going to hold the Democrat Party to account? I will tell the Republicans if and when they took over the House of Representatives, that I’m going to lead an effort here behind this microphone. That I’ve touched on it a few times, but I’m going to push it hard. To impeach Joe Biden. To impeach the secretary of homeland security. For many, many reasons to impeach the attorney general of the United States. They are in positions of responsibility, the borders are wide open intentionally so we were contacted the other day with this video you’re seeing all over television. About how the feds, through these federal contractors are bringing in illegal aliens into New York and this is happening in every virtually every state and the local police don’t even know what the hell’s going on. We can’t have government. Like this, that doesn’t. Coordinate with other levels of government that doesn’t talk to the American people. We cannot have this. We have tons of fentanyl coming into this country killing our young people. Tons of fentanyl with rapists coming in here, MS 13 coming in here, carjackers coming here, kidnappers coming in here. The cartels are making a fortune. A ton. We have sex slavery in this country like we’ve never seen before. And the media tolerated. Jim Acosta is busy calling the governor of Virginia effectively a Stalinist, Liz Cheney’s busy trying to take over the Republican Party when she conducts a Stalinist like. Hearing. What’s going on is it is a disaster for the American people. A disaster. And we cannot forget what entities and what individuals. Undermind. Law enforcement across this country that has resulted in the mayhem and the chaos as if we are a third world. Involved in a civil war. The bodies are piling up, the innocent people. They’re being murdered and maimed. The stores that have to shutter. This is an America. It’s the Democrat Party in the media, it’s the American Marxist ideology. Some people you’re really over the top of this American Marxist that I am right on that target, I am hitting the nail right on the head. One day that’ll be understood by more than just us. I’m more than just us. When you are. Destroying law enforcement. Then attacking the Second Amendment, people can’t protect themselves, and even if they can use the Second Amendment, then you have Sora’s prosecutors charging them. When they use their guns to protect themselves, their property, their homes perceive threats. Disarming them by. Legal attack. So we have these three policemen shot in Houston. The latest word is they’re stable with two policemen murdered in New York in the last 48 hours. Now, if a policeman shoots an individual and there’s a crowd around and there’s an iPhone, and if the policeman’s white in the individual’s black or not white, I should say, we automatically have a civil rights issue. Tell me those three policemen shot in Houston. What were their race, Mr. Producer? We have no idea because it only goes one way. That’s what happens when you politicize civil rights and you politicize crime. And you lie about systemic racism. This country is diverse in every respect, it’s the least racist country on the planet. We send people to war. To fight and defend individuals who are complete strangers, who don’t look like us, who don’t practice the same religion as the vast majority, the Christians in this country. And as I’ve said many, many times. You look at our military cemetery. Nobody ever answers me on this. You want to talk about white privilege? The vast majority of people who are dead in these military graves. Our white Christian men, not all, obviously, some are Jewish, some are Muslim, some are atheists, whatever, some are black, some are there, some of them absolutely. We have heroes and I’m the one saying it in every corner of this country with every background. But what you see most of are seeds of crisis. And in the ground. Sees a white man. Even though other people die for this country, too, again, black, Hispanic, you name it. We should at least accept the fact that the media in this country, the Democrat Party, tenured professors. That there are people in this country who are ripping us apart or undermining our traditions and institutions who are poisoning our history and our patriotism, whether they’re overpaid football players, whether they’re overpaid basketball players or ESPN broadcasters. Whether they’re overpaid broadcasters at CNN or MSNBC, whether they’re tenured, useless professors at one university or another. Whether they are individuals making a fortune of books promoting America as a racist nation. Whether they are union bosses. And Democrat politicians. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 2
When a very smart caller last evening. You asked me what I thought was a relatively straightforward question. Can the vice president, the United States, as the president of the Senate, break a tie vote, cast a tie vote? Should there be a 50 50 vote for a Supreme Court nominee? And I said yes after the program. I wasn’t happy with that answer. And I think the caller’s inferences, it’s fairly complicated. The caller, if that was his inference, is correct. So I spent a lot of time last night and very early this morning studying this issue, reading what’s available out there. Of course, the text of the Constitution and the plain reading of the Constitution really is about process and legislation, not about nominees. Then I’ve looked at the history and several nominees to various positions in the executive branch have in fact been confirmed by 51 to 50 votes or the equivalent thereof, with the vice president casting the tie breaking vote as the president of the Senate. But this has never, ever happened with the Supreme Court. The occasion has never presented itself. And I’m going to discuss this maybe later this hour, but certainly by the second hour, there’s only one court mentioned in the Constitution. It’s the United States Supreme Court. Congress created all the other courts, the circuit courts, how many circuit courts there would be, how many judges on the circuit courts, federal district courts and other courts, but not the Supreme Court. So why the number of justices was not provided for in the Constitution? The court itself was. So just to give you a little taste of this and I will jump into this much more deeply, I went and looked at the Federalist Papers with a few hints from Hamilton there. But the biggest hint, again, is going back to the text. The plain reading of the text, it does not encompass nominees with a history of nominees receiving votes from vice presidents as presidents, as president of the Senate, but not a Supreme Court justice. And again, the Supreme Court is the only court mentioned in the Constitution and it’s mentioned in Article three, Article one broadly stated Congress Article two broadly stated, the executive branch, article three broadly stated. The adjudication, the court. So I got to thinking, do we really believe the framers of the Constitution would give the executive branch the power to nominate an individual to the Supreme Court? And should there be a tie to confirm that same individual? Well, think about what I’m saying. I have not seen this argument anyway. I’m just trying to digest everything that I took in. I don’t believe this would serve the purposes of an independent court or a separation of powers.
Hour 1 Segment 3
Well, since I started it, I guess I should elaborate a little bit and underscored. So the backbencher’s when they regurgitate it tomorrow, they will they will have the straight. As you know, to keep it as elementary as I can, Constitution sets up three separate branches. This wasn’t a foregone conclusion. There were big battles over this, trying to figure it out. Best way to handle this. There were also objections to the proposal that the vice president should be the president of the Senate, but quite frankly, didn’t know what other job to give the vice president. And so the Senate’s tied, they needed a way to address that. So the vice president serving is the president of the Senate, you know, the vice president, United States could sit up at that chair in the Senate every day. Because she’s the president and the Senate doesn’t have a lot of power to cast a vote, you know, oversee the parliamentary procedures or Robert’s Rules, if you will. So if there’s a tie vote, she can vote to break the tie votes on legislation. What about all nominees early on? When it came to certain types of nominees, vice president would cast the vote. There was some debate about it, not a lot of litigation. There’s a little bit of litigation about this, actually, but not a ton. And. Then you see situations, particularly starting in the 70s, where these votes were get closer and closer, so a vice president might need to break a tie vote. Now, Vice President Pence voted many times more than most vice presidents to break a tie vote for Cabinet nominees, for instance, Betsy Davos. Now, why did he have to do that? Because really, the attack on Trump’s ability to fill his government was like nothing else we’d ever seen. So you have these close votes and pencils as president of the Senate, he voted several times on nominees, 51 50 to get them over the finish line. And there’s a couple of instances of procedures that allowed. The voting of a judge was I needed a majority vote or they needed to overcome the filibuster. There’s never been such a vote on a Supreme Court nominee who’s never had to be and I’m going to predict to you right now, there won’t be here. Why? Because you have members of the Senate like Romney Collins. Murkowski, and they’re not alone. We’re not. Going to want to stop. The installing of, quote unquote, a historic figure. You might even have Lindsey Graham, I don’t know. I don’t think you’re going to see 50 Republicans voting no. Unless Biden. Does something truly, outrageously stupid, and I think there’ll be a little bit more careful on this and they won’t just leave it to his own devices, but that aside, as a practical matter, as I say, I don’t think that’s going to happen. I don’t think there’s any good arguments as I’ve studied this now for the position that the vice president, the United States can cast a tie vote to confirm a Supreme Court justice. I think all the arguments are to the negative. We talked about the three branches, separation of powers. Supreme Court justices are lifetime appointees to make them independent from the other branches. And it would be a strange. A strange thing, indeed, if the entire. Procedures set up in the Constitution to create these separate branches competing against themselves in hopes that they’ll be coequal to prevent the concentration of power. It will be strange indeed, if the argument is that a president can nominate a a potential justice to the Supreme Court and in a 50 50 Senate, should that be the the the vote that his vice president. By casting her vote could then confirm to a lifetime appointment under Article three, a Supreme Court justice nominated by her boss. I don’t know how much more clearly I can say it, Mr. Producer. I see no support for that, none whatsoever, even though it wasn’t teed up exactly as I said. For all the other reasons, when you read the Federalist Papers, when you look at the structure of the Constitution, when you look at the arguments that were made in Philadelphia. To allow the vice president is the president of the Senate to cast a tie breaking vote on a Supreme Court justice literally undermines the entire enterprise. But here’s the next question. To a number one, I don’t see it happening as a practical matter. Number two, I don’t think constitutionally it could be supported in any way anyway. But here’s the next question, number three. The Democrats are brazen. They’re power hungry, they’re rogue, they have no respect for the Constitution, even though they wave it around when they can. And those who wrote it, they’ve made that abundantly clear. And they want to change it, not by convention, not by amendment, but by a 50 50 vote in the Senate with the help of the vice president, 51 50 and three or four extra votes in the House. So they are more than happy to embrace lawlessness. And should they do that, should the situation arise where it’s 50/50? And Harris, despite what I’m saying to you, votes to confirm the nominee, so it’s 51 50. Remember, the House has no role in this. What can the Republicans do? You might say sue them, take it to the Supreme Court. At the Supreme Court has an interest in this to. You’re talking about. Adjudicating the issue of whether one of its members. Can be chosen effectively by the vice president, the United States with a tie vote. With the Supreme Court take the case up what they called a political question, of course, it’s bigger than a political question under the political doctrine. This is a. Four Corners constitutional issue, just as it was during the last election when you had different state officials changing the election processes in these various states when only the state legislature can do it. That was a teed up. Four Corners constitutional issue that the court not only should have taken up because it didn’t, it is created and you will see quite a bit of electoral anarchy, I predict. So that will be a question to. The court takes it up, nobody can stop them if it doesn’t take it up, nobody could stop them. But you wouldn’t want a justice serving on the Supreme Court based on that scenario, I can tell you that because that justice will never be looked at as legitimate. Oh, they may make movies about that. Justice in Hollywood is the first. This is the first that. But there will always be that actress. Always for those who care, but who knows? So if you take the opposite position, you you bump into, you don’t bump into, you crash into the separation of powers issue. You crash into the text of the constitution, you crash into the Federalist Papers and you crash into the fact that you really don’t have any argument to support your position other than to say that a vice president serving as Senate has voted before. On nominations, we’re not talking about nominations. We’re talking about the Supreme Court, the only court that has actually created directly by the United States Constitution. I hope that clears things up. I want to thank the gentleman last night. I forget his name for the question. It deserved more attention and now I’m giving it more attention. This much we do know. Let’s take a little early break here, because we’re going to need a bit longer segment. I have an article in front of me, Black Lives Matter account unaccounted for after leaders quietly jumped ship. Now, this is a big deal. This is a big deal because we had to deal with this for two years. What is going on a Black Lives Matter right now? Does it even exist? We’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 4
Some, by the way, are rightly pointing to. Federalist number 69, certainly one of the places to wait for Hamilton writes in the national government at the Senate should be divided. No appointments should be made, you know, contrasting the Constitution with. State governments or other places, in other words. In terms of the deciding vote, quote unquote, by the vice president, the president of the Senate, advice and consent of the Senate, this would disrupt their. If the Senate should be divided, no appointment could be made. 50/50 is no different than 51 49 if the confirmation doesn’t occur. See what I’m saying, 50/50 is a loss as much as 50, one against 49 for is a loss under the Constitution. That’s the way it is. It’s not like a time we go into overtime or a tie. We have to figure out what to do. A tie is a loss, as if a tie would be a loss in baseball or football sporting events. And typically it’s not, but it is when it comes to a Supreme Court justice. A tie is a loss. If you remember that, then you’ll get this right, and I know you will. Black Lives Matter. Excellent piece by Andrew Curre, investigative reporter, The Washington Examiner. This is important. No one appears to have been in charge of Black Lives Matter for months. They addressed it lists on tax forms as wrong, the charities to board members won’t say who controls it, 60 million dollar bankroll, a Washington Examiner investigation has found. Bombs, shocking lack of transparency surrounding its finances and operations raises major legal and ethical red flags, multiple charity experts told The Washington Examiner. Like a giant ghost ship full of treasure drifting in the night with no captain, no discernible crew and no clear direction, Charity Watch executive director Lori Cetron said a BLM Styron excuse. BLM co-founder Patrice Collier’s appointed two activists to service the group’s senior directors following her resignation in May amid scrutiny over personal finances. But both quietly announced in September that they never took the jobs due to disagreements with BLM. They told The Washington Examiner they don’t know who now leads the nation’s most influential social justice organization. That’s not correct. It’s a Marxist organization. Paul Colmenar, counsel for the conservative watchdog group the National Legal and Policy Center. He’s terrific in that group, is terrific, said a full audit. An investigation into Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, the legal entity that represents the national BLM movement, is warranted. He said this is grossly irregular and improper for a nonprofit with 60 million dollars in its coffers. The airline previously came under fire from local black activists after The New York Post reported in April that Collier’s, then its executive director, had spent three point two million dollars on real estate across the United States. The reports the BLM denied allegations say Collier spent BLM funds on her personal properties. However, BLM and other activist organizations under Collier’s control offered contracts to an art company led by the father of her only child. The Daily Caller reported correas announced in May she was stepping down and that activist Makani Themba and Monifa Bandele would lead the organization as senior executives. But Semba and Bandele revealed in September they never actually took the job because of disagreements with BLM, quote, Acting Leadership Council, unquote. They both told The Washington Examiner they do not know who took over as Belgium’s top executive after their departure, and neither would say who served on the council. We never actually started in the position, so we never received any detailed information. Now, with the charity’s finances, while a charity’s finances are ultimately the responsibility of its board of directors, BLM bylaws explicitly state it’s the executive director, quote, who shall have charge of all funds and securities of the corporation, unquote. Look at that, Mr. Producer, Marks’s Corporation, the two remaining BLM board members, shall Amaya Bowers and Raymond Howard, did not return numerous requests for comment, asking who’s been in charge of BLM and its money since Collins left the charity in May. Well, how intriguing, we can’t get a basic answer, Bowers served as the treasurer for multiple activist organizations run by colleagues including BLM, PAC and a Los Angeles based jail reform group that pay collieries 20000 dollars a month and drop nearly twenty six thousand dollars for meetings, quote unquote, at a luxury Malibu beach resort in 2019. I wonder if there are countless Hunter Biden, Mr. Producer. As recently as last Friday, Howard’s link and profile stated he’s the director of operations for, quote, an international social justice organization, unquote. Page was modified after the Washington Examiner contacted Tower for comment. Now states he serves as the director of operations for, quote, a nonprofit. A reference to Howard’s position as the finance operations manager of New Impact Partners, a Dayton, Ohio based consulting firm owned by his sister, was also removed from his LinkedIn profile. Boy, this overthrowing our government business is getting very complicated and lucrative for some people. Also, as recently as last Friday, a Web site for new IMPAC partners attributed a quote to Raymon from Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, thanking the consulting firm for its help. Solving problems, organizational challenges. The attribution was removed from the website after the Washington Examiner asked Howard how much BLM has paid his sister’s firm. Now, despite new IMPAC Partner’s apparent efforts to conceal its affiliation with BLM, the consulting firm continues to solicit applications for its, quote, talent network, unquote, which it says will connect job applicants directly to BLM and other activist organizations. Long time charity expert Doug White said it’s a red flag that BLM won’t answer basic questions about its finances or leadership structure. Sixty million dollars isn’t chump change, White said, but BLM does is of tremendous social importance that they won’t give in an honest or complete or straightforward answer in regards to its leadership as a concern. Not only do they not have an executive director right now, we think, but they also don’t want to tell you how the organization is being run. My goodness. Well, and it goes on and on. Kamara said his watchdog group believes there should be a full audit. Bottom line, a lot of questionable financial activity, organizational structure, location of the books, etc. that call for a full investigation. So will the IRS conduct a full investigation of Black Lives Matter? Well, the Joe Biden, IRS, Doozer, and by the way, will they conduct a full scale investigation of Media Matters to see if they are, in fact a non-profit? Bipartisan, nonpartisan, charity. By all means, isn’t that what Media Matters is, there seem to be a number of organizations. They get a pass, but my focus here is on Black Lives Matter and its various intermediaries, umbrella organizations. Which all do not seem to have a named leader or executive. Where did all the money go? All you chumps who donated to this organization, all you clowns, corporatist clown mayors who wrote their name in the streets, why don’t you follow up and tell us where is Black Lives Matter? I’ll be right back.