October 19th, 2022

On Wednesday’s Mark Levin Show, the election integrity legislation in Georgia is designed to make it harder to cheat and contrary to the lies in the media has nothing to do with racism. Don’t allow the left to drag you into the hell that they’ve created. On January 6th, 2005 Democrats claimed that electronic voting machines had changed votes taking them from the Democrats and giving them to the Republicans. Thirty-one Members of Congress, including J6 Committee Chair Bennie Thompson, objected to the counting of the electoral votes in an attempt to change the outcome of a presidential election. In fact, Democrats have done it to the past three Republicans to win the presidency. Yet the media won’t dare call them election deniers. Then, the media easily forgets the violence of Democrats rioting during the inauguration of Donald Trump or the violence following the Republican National Committee outside the White House. Democrats are never held accountable like the people that committed violence on January 6th. Later, President Biden was asked why he was releasing 15 million barrels of oil from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve and lied like he always does. Afterward, Blake Masters joins the show to explain that Sen. Mark Kelly chose to leave the border open instead of acting in support of Arizonans. Masters says that Kelly is just a rubber stamp for Biden, Schumer, and Pelosi.

Photo by Jessica McGowan

The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.

Rough transcript of Hour 1

Hour 1 Segment 1

Early voting in Atlanta. A historic record. They’ve never had so many people vote on the first day of early voting. As far as history can tell, as far as records go. And yet I have in front of me one headline after another. From last year, March and April, in which the media are trashing. The Georgia state legislature, which is Republican. In which the attorney general of the United States is trashing the Georgia legislature and bringing a lawsuit in violation, he says of the Voting Rights Act in 1965. In which one corporation after another signed a letter condemning the Republican Georgia legislature, in which. Joe Biden. Talked about Jim Egal. Meaning that this was worse than Jim Crow. And more people. Have voted in the first day of early voting in Atlanta than any time in modern history. Since early voting, all the talk about Republicans wanting voter suppression. All the talk about those racist Republicans throwbacks to the 1960s, they don’t want people voting. When will the rest of the country catch up with the rest of us and understand what cynical. Liars were pathological liars, the Democrats are. Starting at the top with Biden, but working its way all the way down to local officials. Now, what are they going to say about this at CNN? What are they going to say about this at MSNBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS? What are they going to say about this Major League Baseball, Coca-Cola and several hundred other corporate cowards and leftists? The fact is. All the legislature was trying to do was to make sure the vote is secure and the cheaters can’t cheat. Nothing to do with race, nothing to make it harder to vote if you want to vote. And people are voting. You had newspapers all the way up the East Coast and in New England, you had New Jersey dotcom, you had newspapers throughout the state of California and the rest of the country because they’re all left wing quacks. You had PB’s NPR. Everybody through and the Brennan Center and this center and that center, one think tank after another, think tank, all liars. All liars. How many more times we’re going to go through this America? Were these people Dragas? Into their hell that they create because it’s going on and on and on the Huffington Post. Go ahead, Google them. It’s one after another. They just trashed and trashed and trashed. Have fortune, you have AP, you have Reuters. You are Vox. Yahoo! So many others. So many others. And you’re not going to hear squat from one of them. It’s just like covering up the Hunter Biden laptop, although get to it maybe in a year of squirt out a little story here and there, and that’ll be the end of it. These people lie. And lie and lie about everything. January six. Dizzy, Liz Cheney and the rest self-righteous buffoons. Well, maybe we ought to remember January six, Mr. Producer. Maybe we should remember January six, what about January six, 2005? She will remember that. What happened on January six? Two thousand five. Bennie Thompson is the chairman. Of the Stalinist January six, Pelosi. Committee. And they desperately want to subpoena Trump and create a criminal situation. They’re trying to litigate Trump to death. They’re trying to leak against Trump to death. And of course, this January six committee has one purpose to try and prevent Donald Trump. From getting his good name back and from running for office and the damage, the Republicans. January 6th. But what happened on January six, 2005, Bennie Thompson should know. He’s the chairman of this committee now, the media know, but they don’t talk about. Byron York picked up on it. But The Washington Examiner. The 2004 presidential election was a relatively close one. George W. Bush won re-election with 286 electoral votes to Democratic challenger John Kerry’s 251. The vote counting went into the night and into the early morning of November three, it all came down to Ohio, which had 20 electoral votes. If Ohio went for Bush in 2004, it would win a second term. If Ohio chose Kerry, he would win the White House. Exit polls showed Kerry with a solid lead in Ohio. Many Democrats and some of the press, too, simply assumed that would be the final result in Mr. Producer. You remember those those exit polls where they had Kerry had 16 points in Pennsylvania and I was on the air. And you remember what I said? That’s not possible. They were wrong way wrong about Pennsylvania, Ohio. In fact, they all admitted later to the pollsters they didn’t get it right. But that didn’t stop the Democrats in the early evening. Robert Shrum, Kerry’s top adviser, famously said to the candidate, now, I’d be the first to say, Mr. President, that Kerry’s lead, if it ever existed, didn’t last. As the count continued, Bush took the lead and won Ohio by roughly 50 one to 49 percent. In the end, he prevailed with more than 100,000 votes in the state. Then something odd happened. Democratic activists claim that Bush had cheated. First, they accuse Republicans of suppressing the vote, but of course, that wasn’t really new. They always accuse Republicans of suppressing the vote. Then they blame the GOP for long lines at some polling places. Then came what today would be called the crazies. Some Democrats began to embrace theories that electronic voting machines had secretly switched votes from Kerry to Bush. There was much discussion amplified on the Internet in those pre social media days about the machine maker Diebold and the alleged security flaws in its machines that made them susceptible to hacking. Some Democrats in Congress joined the speculation. The leader among them was Representative John Conyers, who’s been replaced with. Tally, who started an investigation of the allegations less than one month after the election on December eight, 2004, converts out of form on the Ohio situation, it was filled with suspicion and speculation about the election. Maybe the CEO of Diebold, a Bush supporter, manipulated his machines to throw the election for the president, maybe Ohio Republican secretary of state. An African-American, Kenneth Blackwell, a major villain in Democratic circles, rigged the process in favor of Bush. Maybe it was both. There were two categories of fraud in the Ohio election. Cliff Arnebeck, a top official of Common Cause Ohio, told Conyers. The first was the open and conspicuous fraud. The second was the hidden fraud that can only be disclosed by careful investigation. And it is this fraud. When you look at the statistical analysis, he said, you see these anomalies, these statistical anomalies that can only be explained by forms of computer manipulation that would be conspicuous to election officials that are a direct attack on the integrity of our election process. And we have considerable evidence that that’s what took place. I don’t think he was ever sued while there was nothing to it, but some Democrats adopted arguments like that, they thought statistical anomalies, so-called explain the Ohio results. They began to call their cause election integrity. And those Democrats became more, not less suspicious as time passed. And January six, 2005, the date the Congress would count the electoral votes approached, a group of Democrats decided to challenge the certification of Ohio’s 20 electoral votes, a move that, if successful, could switch the election from Bush to Cheney. They objected using the Electoral Count Act, the now familiar 19th century law that requires a member of the House to rise an objection to the vote of a particular state and then to enlist support of at least one senator for the objection to go forward in 2001, when the Congressional Black Caucus protested Bush’s victory in Florida, his first victory. They didn’t have a senator to go along with them, but this time a 2005 doubting Democrats did. I seek to object to the electoral votes of the state of Ohio on the grounds that they were not under all the known circumstances regularly given. And I do have a senator, the late Stephanie Tubbs Jones, Democrat Ohio, said on the floor the Senator Tubbs Jones had enlisted was Senator Barbara Boxer of California. Under the Electoral Count Act, both houses of Congress then retreated to their separate places to debate the objections to Ohio’s count. There were no other senators that would join Boxer. The final vote was 74 to one against the Ohio challenge in the Senate. The 25 senators who didn’t vote didn’t show up because they viewed this as a ceremonial session. But in the House, it was a different story, Tubbs Jones had allies not enough to win, but enough to mount a serious protest. And what happened when the vote was taken? Thirty one House Democrats voted against recognizing Ohio’s electoral votes, whatever they said about the process, the fact was they voted against certifying the electoral votes that made the difference in the 2004 presidential election. In other words, they wanted to overturn the results. And Bennie Thompson, the time he was beginning his seventh term in the House and had become the ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee to becoming an influential member of the House, although not an influential as his colleague, Representative James Clyburn, now the third ranking Democrat in the House who voted against certifying Ohio’s votes, who voted to prevent George W. Bush his reelection in 2004. But Thompson joined the protest, too, that would have overturned a presidential election had it succeeded. He was one of the thirty one. He was one of the 31 and now you can see, ladies and gentlemen, where the Republicans got the idea in the first place. They didn’t start this, the Democrats did, the Democrats the. So as you can see. It is they. Who are evil? It is they who wanted to overturn it election. Now, to the best of my knowledge, none of these people had been under criminal investigation for what they did. And let me tell you something, they tried to pull it in 2000, as you’ll see in a moment. They did pull it in 2004. And then in twenty sixteen, they tried a different tact that Russia had elected Donald Trump. They tried to stop Bush twice. They tried to stop Trump twice. The first time they failed. I’m bringing this up because when the Democrats talk about election deniers. Like climate change deniers, like Holocaust denier. They’re trying to keep create the impression that the Republicans are anti. There were democracy. You’ll hear reporters asking every Republican running for office, do you accept the last election results, do you or don’t you? You don’t ever hear them ask? Well, you Democrats, did you accept the election of George Bush either time? No, you didn’t. And leading Democrats said it over and over again from Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton to Hillary Clinton to Nancy Pelosi over and over again. That’s what they said, the election deniers of the Democrats. Let me remind you one other thing. And that is up to the election in 2020, up to that date. The Democrats brought some 300 lawsuits that changed the election rules in key states. To change the election rules, key states in violation of the federal constitution. More on that when I return

Hour 1 Segment 2

There was a piece in The New York Times some time ago, almost three years ago, by Professor Miller of University, Iowa. And the headline was Democrats have been shameless about your presidential vote to. And what he points out here. Is so much of what took place on the floor of the House and it’s really in modern times. A few objectors objections were filed in accordance with the Electoral Count Act and the 20th century, but starting with George W. Bush’s victory in 2000, Democrats contested election results after every Republican win. After every Republican when they went to the floor to challenge electoral votes in order to change the outcome of the election when Republicans won, they also did it with Donald Trump, but they were worse with Donald Trump. 2017, January, Democrats in Congress once again challenged the election outcome. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts cited the confirmed and illegal activities engaged in by the Russian government. And it went on and on and on. It’s funny how truth context is never provided.

Hour 1 Segment 3

So every single Republican presidential victory since 2000 has been challenged by the Democrats, every single one. Every single one. And then it comes to a head. In 2020, only then. To the Democrats and Mitch McConnell, a bar, a bipartisan movement by the radical Democrats and the RINO Republicans to rewrite the night the eighteen eighty seven law that set up the process in the joint session of Congress, only then is it called for. Not in 2000, not in 2004, not in 2016. No, no, no. Only in. Interesting, isn’t it? So the left wingers were doing this for some time, the Democrats were doing this for some time, and yet you don’t even know this because, of course, the media and there’s a new poll out on the media, which you despise and rightly so. It’s not interested. They’re not going to tell you about it. I want to remind you of something. And this is from Roll Call Dotcom, hardly a conservative paper. More than in previous election cycles, right, Simon Pathé in December 2019, national Democratic groups are making litigation over electronic voting laws a key part of their 2020 strategy. A handful of Democratic groups are currently litigating at about a dozen cases for what they see as unfair election laws and maps across the country, as it turns out, there’s more than a handful and there were hundreds of cases brought. This is a dramatic uptick in the amount of voting rights litigation relative to past cycles, said Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias. He’s the sleazeball, the chairman of the Perkins Kuwait Political Law Group and the party’s warrior in this fight. See how they cheer. It’s no longer with the firm. He started his own. The multimillion dollar investment in a concerted legal strategy is an acknowledgement of how important minority and youth voters are to Democratic efforts to turn out their base in states that will be pivotal in next year’s House, Senate and presidential elections. We’re looking at future battlegrounds, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairwoman Cheri Bustos told CQ Roll Call by phone. The strategy is also a recognition that without the control of state legislatures of the U.S. Senate. There is little Democrats in government can do ahead of the 2020 election to reverse some of the voting laws that GOP controlled legislatures have passed, and it goes on. And so this is the issue. Remember, we’ve talked about this North Carolina case gets picked up by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court upholds the federal constitution and says, wait a minute. It is the state legislatures that determine the voting and the electoral processes that lead to the selection of electors. That’s what the Constitution says in black and white. We don’t even need to go back and look at anything. This is why you have law professors, Democrat legal groups, Democrat Party operatives and the media all saying that this is a. A single state or state legal theory, and this is why they’re trying to create the impression that this would be a radical decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to actually uphold that language in the federal Constitution because the Democrats have a strategy that worked in 20 20. As corrupt as it was, that is the change the laws in key states. Not by electing Republican excuse me, Democrat legislatures. But by going to Democrat governors, by going to Democrat secretaries of state who have no say in it, by going to Democrat state judges, Democrat Supreme Courts in the states, and that’s what they did. That’s what they did in North Carolina when it came to redistricting. The speaker of the House and the others in the Republican legislature in North Carolina said not you’re violating the Constitution. And so that’s why they’re so worked up about this. Because finally, slowly, some Republicans are on to them, to their credit in Pennsylvania, they were on to them early on. But in other states, it was a little slower, but still, to their credit, they’re challenging this. But again, starting at two thousand and every Republican elected president since the Democrats challenge the electors to try and change the outcome of the election. And up to and running up the 20 20, they went even further, they went even further, they went into the States after they lost in twenty sixteen after their challenges to that election failed, after the Russian collusion failed. They went further, their lawyers went in the courts, state courts, primarily some federal courts. Strategically with tens of millions of dollars backing them up. Democrat and left wing donor funds dark money to change the election laws, so they succeeded in several states, including Pennsylvania. You get my points here, Mr. Producer. I think you do. Little bit of a reminder, Democrats denying election results again. Yesterday, we addressed one of the two issues. They’re running on abortion and protecting women’s bodies, but they’re not protecting women’s bodies because rape is through the roof and they’re soft on crime. They’re letting criminals out while rape is a violation of a woman’s body in the worst, most violent, inhumane way. Killing unborn babies, which science tells us their babies all the way up to the last minute before birth. That’s the position of the Democrats on abortion. It’s almost eugenics. And their position on democracy with the January six hearing, the only reason we’re spending time on this is to show you how have they lie repeatedly? It’s another week, sister, may I say that, Mr. Producer, I think I will. The RNC put this out a bit ago, montage one cut, one go, you can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee and you can have the election stolen from you. How can you win with Russian interference? That’s about 20, 20, but rightly because I do an illegitimate president that didn’t really win. So how do you fight that at 20 percent? You are absolutely right. He’s an illegitimate president in my mind. Would you be my vice president, folks? I absolutely agree with that. Actually win the election in 2016. We lost the election. He was put in all mythology. Russia’s Trump knows he’s an illegitimate president. The president elect, although legally elected, is not legitimate. President Bush as the legitimate president, you said you believe that Russia’s interference altered the outcome of the election. I do. We have a president who, if in fact, it is proven, has been assisted by the Russians and may, in fact, not be a legitimate president. The one thing that Trump is fearful of when it comes to his being president is that finally we will see how illegitimate his victory actually was. I have an objection. I object to the 15 votes from the state of North Carolina. I objected because people were horrified. He’s an illegitimate president. Do you believe Trump is illegitimate president? What I believe is that there’s no question that the outcome of this election was affected by the Russian interference. There absolutely is a cloud of illegitimacy. So that legitimacy is in question. Yes, that was a very tainted election. And in that sense, it’s illegitimate. Why do you think the president is going to such great lengths to essentially prove that? Because he knows he didn’t he knows he’s an illegitimate president, stolen emails, stolen drone, stolen travel and stolen election. Welcome to the world of unprecedented. Trump said he will be president. Trump is an illegitimate president. Those are what I just said, which I can track the Russian attempt to have the election and frankly, the FBI is in on the election, I think makes you think it makes this election illegitimate. There was a widespread understanding that this election was not on the level. We still don’t know what really happened. I mean, there’s just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover, but you don’t win by three million votes and have all these other shenanigans, stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, whoa, something’s not right here. The outcome of the election was affected by their interference. And now we need to know to what degree, if any, the Trump campaign was actually in collusion with the Russians. He knows he’s an illegitimate president. So, of course, he’s obsessed with me. And I believe that it’s a guilty conscience, which we won the last presidential election. They stole my dogs. Al Gore won that election. I think you won anyway. Actually, I think I carried Florida, Bush versus Gore. A court took away a presidency of all the votes were counted that Al Gore would be president today and George Bush will be back in court. I come from Florida, where you and others participating in what I call the United States court, a time there’s no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president. I rise to object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral votes on the subject because of the overwhelming evidence of official misconduct. Deliberate adjournment until the chair must remind me it is signed by myself on behalf of my diverse constituents and the millions of Americans who have been disenfranchised by Florida’s inaccurate vote count. The United States decided this election speaking to a Democratic group in Chicago to say he made it clear he thinks Al Gore was the winner. The time it was over, our candidate had won the popular vote and all the way that could win the election was to stop the voting in Florida. Katherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Jim Baker and the Supreme Court and tampered with the results. Al Gore would be president. And Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000, although not the presidency of the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court stopped counting the votes to let the count go on with that vote. The Supreme Court selected George W. Bush as the president and he was not elected. There is overwhelming evidence that George W. Bush did not win this election. What I observed as a voter, as a citizen of Illinois four years ago were troubling evidence of the fact that not every vote was being counted. Don’t like that George W. Bush won the election in 2000 against Al Gore because I think he probably lost Florida and also nationwide. You invite me back on this show in about eight weeks ago where Al Gore actually did get all the votes. The court has been thwarting formation of the popular will, the most spectacular example being Bush versus Gore, where the majority by a five four vote and join the counting of more than one hundred thousand ballots in Florida and essentially that first quarter point to President Bush, although I think in 2000 everybody thought, well, he did win the election. Al Gore, after the election, when you stole the election, you came back here and said, get over it. No, we’re not going to get over. And, you know, I don’t know if we won that election. Constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio and malfunctioning electronic machines, which may not have paper receipts, have led to additional loss of confidence by the public. The right to vote has been stolen from qualified voters in 2000 and for the democratic process was thwarted in the 2004 presidential election in Ohio was riddled with unnecessary problems. Some machines malfunctioned, causing votes to be counted more than once or not at all. Based upon an inordinate number of allegations suggesting race, voting rights violations and misconduct. I joined with my colleagues and objected to counting the state of Ohio’s electoral votes. Nazan two thousand. The votes of many wanted to pretend we’re not, in fact, counted as last Friday night I arranged to meet Senator Kerry at a fundraiser to give him a copy of my book. He told me he now thinks the election was stolen. The wife of John Kerry said she has lingering doubts about the legitimacy of the election. Her theory goes like this. Two brothers she calls hard right? Republicans own 80 percent of the voting machines in the U.S. Therefore, it would be easy to hack into the machines that control the electronic voting. There’s another five minutes. Of the election, Denias. So in 2000. George Bush is an illegitimate president appointed by the Supreme Court in 2004. George Bush, again, is an illegitimate president. They stole the election in Ohio in 2016. Donald Trump’s an illegitimate president because the Russians gave him the election. And in 2020. Donald Trump is the election denier, they say, because he questions how it’s possible to receive almost 75 million votes more than any other human being who ever ran for president. And to lose to Joe Biden, who got 80 million votes. With all this litigation in this other activity taking place. Who are the election deniers, quote unquote, ladies and gentlemen? Who’ve been trying to destroy the electoral system and then try to nationalize it to benefit one party and one party only. Democracy, they don’t stand for democracy. They stand for totalitarianism, that’s who they are. We’ll be right back.

Hour 1 Segment 4

Jamie Raskin opposed the Bush election in 2000, he opposed it in 2004, he opposed the Trump election. In 2016, he sat on both impeachment panels. That man is the leader of a coup effort. And it is all over TV talking about democracy and how the Republicans have these extremists. Here he is on the floor. Challenging the awarding of electors cut three go for purposes memorized. I have an objection because 10 of the 29 electoral votes cast by Florida were cast by electors not lawfully certified because they violated Florida’s prohibition against dual office is out of order. Section 15 and 17 of Title three of the United States code requires any objection be presented in writing signed by both members of the House of Reps. Both a member of the House of Representatives and a senator is the objection in writing and signed not only by the member of the House, but also by Senate is in writing. Mr. President, is it signed by Senate? Not as of yet. In that case, the objection cannot be. So this was January six, 2017. Five short years ago when Jamie Raskin. For the third time. Jamie Raskin has challenged the election of every Republican president since 2000. And he sits on the January six committee. I think he was there in 2000, if not 2004. In 2016. And they’re lecturing you and me. But insurrections about election denying, about accepting the outcome. It’s funny how Chuck Todd, none of the Sunday shows address this CNN, MSNBC, none of the media, and we’ll get to them in a moment. You hate them and you should. And wait until you hear about Liz Cheney at the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics yesterday. Yes, she’s very welcome. Where she used to be despite.