On Monday’s Mark Levin Show, three people were hunted down and killed by a gunman in a racially motivated shooting at a Dollar General store in Jacksonville, Florida. The Neo-Nazi movement and anti-black racism grew out of the Democrat party, not the Republican party, and the idea from the democrat media that Ron DeSantis has encouraged either is just appalling. Also, the House Judiciary committee is launching an investigation into the phony Georgia DA Fani Willis and the circumstances around her politically motivated actions against Donald Trump. Meanwhile, we have a fraud dressed up as a judge in Washington D.C. who is a radical Obama hack, and despite there being scores of witnesses and documents they are setting a March 2024 trial date for Donald Trump, giving Jack Smith everything he wants. The Trump defense cannot appeal substantively and get proper legal representation in such a short timeframe. It is the job of a Grand Jury to indict on the basis of probable cause, not the Federal government. The use of these grand juries, where there is obvious evidence of chicanery by these prosecutors, must be scrutinized at the front end of these various cases. The Democrat party wants a one-party state like all autocracies, particularly Marxist regimes.
Townhall
Biden WH Met With Jack Smith’s Office Just Weeks Before Trump Indictment
Fox News
The Trump prosecutors have a grand jury problem. Where are the defense attorneys?
The Daily Fetched
House Judiciary Committee Launches Investigation into Georgia DA Fani Willis
The Hill
Pressley fires back on Ramaswamy’s comments: ‘It is deeply offensive’
Photo by Sean Rayford
Rough transcription of Hour 1
Segment 1
There’s a ton of stuff to cover. And when I say that, I don’t mean just pile on. I mean a ton of very important things. North Carolina. Wow. That could have been a disaster. Right. And we were following it closely here. We always worry that some gunmen will shoot. An enormous number of students or fellow Americans. And. Well, it’s not going to happen. So we’re God. We thank God for that. And yet in Jacksonville. There was an individual who went hunting. After black people. And he murdered three black people. Cold blooded. They hadn’t done a damn thing to anybody. And really. You know, in this day and age, when you read stuff like that, you hear about stuff like that, it really does send chills down your spine. It really does. And of course, the gun control nutjobs seize on these things. And. It serves no purpose. It solves nothing when this happens. T.K. Waters is the sheriff of Jacksonville County. Enormously impressive gentleman, African-American. I was watching him speak over the weekend and honestly, he spoke for me. How this guy who did the shooting, just pure evil. Pure evil on course. He’s had a press conference Saturday. And what do you think comes up? And these people were murdered at that Dollar General store. Because they’re black. That’s it. That’s it. And so he’s there and he’s taking the questions. And then this happens. Cut 14. Go! Well, we have to stop people that have bad intentions. The story’s always about guns. People are bad. This guy’s a bad guy. If I take my gun off right now, now in this country, nothing will happen. So I stop. So he took the gun out of its holster. And you put it right on the table. So there it is. Nothing will happen. It’ll sit there. But as soon as wicked persons go ahead, does a wicked person grant them all that anger and start shooting people with it? There is a problem. The problem is the individual. Now, guns are a tool that people used to do, do horrible things. But it’s the individuals that will these things. So we are working hard to try to try to stop them. But in this situation, in this case, there was nothing saying there was nothing illegal about the part. I don’t know what it’s going to take. You know, I write in my book, I explain what law would have stopped something like this. Or what happened in Nashville. Or what happened in Texas or what happens in all these places. What law? I mean, even list all the recommendations that have been made. They would have stopped nothing. Then we have, I say, a rumbling. President of the NAACP in Jacksonville on CNN today. And CNN is now looking for answers. CNN is looking for ratings. And the reason it doesn’t get ratings is reasons like this. Cut 15. Go. Over the weekend, I spoke with my colleague Juliette Kayyem. She used to be an official with the Department of Homeland Security. And she told me that Jacksonville specifically is a breeding ground of neo Nazi ism, that they have been tracking this and seeing this. I mean, what can you tell me and tell us about the climate there in Jacksonville with these hate groups and, by the way. There is a lot of this going on. And there are laws that have been passed, additional laws in Florida that DeSantis has signed. Law enforcement has been given more power to deal with them. But I had to be honest when I went into CPAC this last time in Maryland. Where there are thousands of thousands of conservatives. And I was walking through. From the front entry area, the lobby area, through the building. With my mother in law. And a gentleman. You know, whose name I shall not mention. I was followed by five neo-Nazis. With Nick Fuentes as crowd. And they got right into it with me. These are young people. So I turned around. And I said to them, in essence. Yeah, right. The Jews are the banks and they own they. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. And one of them had an iPhone or more of them had an iPhone. There had to be seven, eight, nine of them. And they posted some of this. But here’s what they didn’t post. It took my forefinger in my right hand. And I pointed at each one of them an inch or two from their faces. I said, You, you, you, you and so forth. I’m very lucky. I don’t kick your asses. Then I turned around with my mother in law and this other gentleman, by the way, the other gentleman took off. I couldn’t find him anymore. He left. He skedaddled away. And by the way, he’s Jewish, too. But he took off. Then they started again and I turned around again and I thought to myself, You know what? I’m going to punch one of these guys. And then. They’re going to sue me because they didn’t hit me first. Then they’ll take everything I have. Or maybe it’ll hurt my mother in law. So I said a few more things and I said, Let’s go. There was fire coming through my nostrils and my ears. I’m telling you right now, I was so angry, I figure. But my father once told me. When I was in elementary school and I was a safety on the corner, there was a bully. There were five or six of them and they were bothering me. And he said to me. Take out the bully. Take out the bully. That went through my mind because the guy on the far right when I was standing there being honest with you. I said, I need to take this punk out. But he put up his camera again and I knocked it out of his hand. He said, Assault, Assault. I said, Yeah, right, Assault. Xavier. Anyway, that was that. Nothing like this. All right, What’s this, for God sakes? All right, ladies and gentlemen. Go ahead, Mr. Producer. I thank the federal government and Justice Department. Going to have to do a better job and exercise exactly where these hate groups are. This. I mean, we see the Confederate side. We’ve seen the Trump signs constantly on our street, on our streets. And we know from that standpoint that there’s hatred and we just going to have to deal with it some kind of way. And Justice Department need to be right here today looking into it. Now I want you to hear from. Representative Maxwell Frost of Florida on MSNBC yesterday cut 16 Go. It’s the same ask I’ve had for the governor for years. That is, to actually take action on gun violence prevention. He needs to do that and he also needs to take on that sound like. Now go ahead. I’m sorry. You move away and stop championing and stop embracing this far right wing movement that is the home of the shooter from yesterday that is so sick of people like this. I’m so sick of them. So now it’s dissent. Excuse me. Dissenters is fault for embracing neo-Nazis. DeSantis despises neo-Nazis. You know, this reminds me, Here’s DeSantis. When he was in the House of Representatives, he was the number one leader in the cause for Israel and to move the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, number one. And before Trump became president, he was promoting it, number one. He’s got massive support among the Orthodox Jews in in Florida, of which there are a substantial number, particularly in South Florida. He’s got a lot of Jewish supporters. And this bastard, this Maxwell Frost, gets up there and makes a comment like that. Makes a comment like that. Now let’s be 100% clear. The neo-Nazi movement grew out of the Democrat Party. anti-Black racism that was the Democrat Party is saying not a Republican Party thing. Let’s be abundantly clear about this. Lynching. That was a Democrat Party thing, not a Republican Party thing. And the idea that the governor of Florida. Who’s done more to fight the neo-Nazis than any governor I’m aware of in that state and has done more to support. Efforts. To criminalize what they do to other people. It’s really is really appalling. And for this to go on on MSNBC yesterday and the other guy on CNN, it’s so sick because they’re all Democrat operations. They all cover for the Democrat Party. It’s what they do. That’s how they conduct themselves. I want to move on. There’s so much stuff going on here today. The House Judiciary Committee is going to launch an investigation into this phony D.A. in Atlanta, Fannie Willis. They want you to call her Fannie. Its Fannie. Fanny like you’re your backside. Fanny. Well, this. House Judiciary Committee announced it’s looking into the conduct of Fulton County DA Fanny Willis and her motivation regarding the indictment of Donald Trump. Trump was arraigned, as you know, Thursday. A statement from the committee says, Missoula’s indictment and prosecution implicate substantial federal interests. And the circumstances surrounding her actions raise serious concerns about whether such actions are politically motivated. Turning first to the question of motivation, it’s noteworthy that just four days before this indictment, he launched a new campaign fundraising website that highlighted your investigation into President Trump. All right. I want to dig into this now. I’m going to start now and we’ll get into it more later. I wrote a piece late yesterday which our friends at Fox Digital posted. And in this piece, I brought up something that nobody’s talking about, the Fifth Amendment in the grand jury issue. And former federal prosecutors and other, I assume, blow this all up. But they need to start paying attention to this stuff because we’ve had horrendous abuses of power by these prosecutors and these grand juries. When I come back. I want to read it to you. Because I don’t have any illusions that all of you are online reading a piece that I wrote and that was posted this morning, although. Hundreds and hundreds of thousands of you have. And I want to get into this and then I want to lead to other issues related to this.
Segment 2
Let’s begin with. Before I get to your injury, what happened? You see, we have a. A fraud dressed up as a judge who slipped through the confirmation process. It was a radical bomb throwing left wing Obama hack. And despite the fact that there are millions and millions of documents, scores and scores of witnesses, at first the U.S. attorney and then the special counsel took over two years to investigate. They go in front of this judge. And they say we want a January trial. Which would be about four months from now. The Trump law is going to say, no, no, no, no, we need time, man, and we’ll go for 2026. She says both positions are extreme. So I will decide March 20, 24. Which is two months after the Department of Justice asked. This is a phony fan dance. In other words, she gave DOJ and Mr. Smith what they wanted. This wasn’t Solomon. This wasn’t a Solomon type decision. This was a marxist kind decision. And so President Trump’s lawyer rightly says we can’t possibly prepare a proper defense under the Constitution out of this time frame. Well, give it a shot, she says. Why? Because the ability to appeal substantively. The issue that President Trump might want to appeal, which is he cannot possibly get. Proper legal representation or. The lawyer cannot possibly give him the kind of representation he needs. In other words, ineffective counsel would be after the fact. She knows this. She’s diabolical. Now, as for moving the venue, here’s what she says. She doesn’t even comment on that yet. But she’s not going to. She says, I’ll watch very carefully the jury and what white people have to say and so forth. Now, why is she doing that? It’s a setup because she knows Donald Trump is going to criticize the process and her and then she’ll turn to Donald Trump’s lawyers and say, well, the jury’s fine. It’s you, Mr. President. You’re the one who’s biased the jury against you. It’s sick.
Segment 3
Here’s what I wrote: the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution states and part. Then no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury. Unless when they presentment or indictment of a grand jury, not a prosecutor. A grand jury that is citizens. Is that what happened when Special counsel Jack Smith? And the Biden Department of Justice used a Washington, D.C. grand jury to charge former President Trump for alleged crimes that occurred in Florida. The so-called documents case, clearly using the wrong venue in violation of a specific DOJ policy, then hastily moved the case to a grand jury in Florida. The protection afforded. By a fair grand jury proceeding dates back many centuries to the Magna Carta and was prominently implemented by British and American courts, applying Blackstone’s legal doctrines. The notion that any grand jury would indict a ham sandwich refers to the usual adoption by grand juries of evidence presented by a prosecutor. It should not eradicate a right that was deemed important enough to be included in the Bill of Rights. The public and the courts must realize that these are accusations crafted and made by the individual prosecutors. And not the result of deliberations and subsequent decisions by a group of ordinary citizens. Since the Florida grand jurors did not hear the testimony. Presented in the DC grand jury. Exactly what did they hear or see to charge the former president and the other defendants? Was the testimony read to them? What were they instructed about the D.C. testimony? Were. They asked whether they had any questions for the witnesses who testified. Were they instructed on the need to find probable cause as to each of the defendants? Well, they instruct on the law. The customary procedure in cases of obvious crimes is just to submit an indictment drafted by the prosecutor to the grand jurors and ask them to vote up or down. When the charges are not about an obvious crime and are instead much more complex, such as in the so-called documents case. The constitutional right to be indicted by a grand jury must require more than that. Indeed, the DC grand jury met for many months, heard from many scores of witnesses. I was presumably provided with an enormous amount of so-called evidence presented to it by the government. We already know from the subsequent public record in the court proceedings in Florida. That the government is turned over to the defendants. Over 1 million documents and nine months of videotape which will be used in whole or part during the trial. From that plus the complexity of the law in this matter, the fact that this is a case of first impression. There are numerous legal and constitutional issues associated with the use in the Espionage Act against a former president. The Florida grand jury not having the benefit of seeing and hearing firsthand any of the witnesses, etc., the government would have been required to ensure that, in fact, the Florida grand jury and not the government indicted the former president based on probable cause, a requisite for each and every of the nearly 40 counts. You understand, Mr. Producer? The government doesn’t indict, the grand jury does. But if you just go through the motions in a case like this and it’s really the government, then the indictments are defective because under the Bill of Rights, the Fifth Amendment, it’s a grand jury that indicts based on probable cause. It’s not in there for fluff. Although the Federal Rules and Criminal Procedure Rule six. Impose a secrecy requirement on federal grand jurors. The judge should. That is Judge Cannon in Florida. Now that the indictment has been returned. Permit defense counsel to interview the grand jurors and release them from any secrecy obligation. Of course, the lawyers down there need to file a motion, which I guess they will eventually. God willing, that is the only way to discover before the defendants are forced to a trial. Whether the Fifth Amendment’s obligation has been satisfied. And again, given how Smith used the D.C. venue and a D.C. grand jury can deduct a very extensive investigation on matters related almost exclusively to events in Florida. This is an especially important issue. In all four cases involving the indictment of President Trump. The media have repeatedly reported that Trump has been indicted by a grand jury, unquote. The real question is whether the grand jury truly deliberated or simply went through the motions at the direction of the prosecution. Did a majority vote to accuse Trump and all his co-defendants of the complex crimes alleged in the indictments. Or was it window dressing for what happened in these secret proceedings? Another obvious example is the case in Georgia. The indictment is 98 pages in length and involves over 40 charges. And moreover, in addition to the individual charges, an umbrella charge of grand conspiracy that is a so-called RICO charge is alleged involving up to 19 co-conspirators, including the former president. This is an extraordinarily complicated, factual and legal indictment. Putting aside the obvious substantive weaknesses of the case and in this case, like the federal documents case, the prosecution has much to answer for. Recall that on the day the grand jury was to meet to vote on whether to indict. The actual indictment was published by the court clerk on the official website before the grand jury had even met, let alone voted. Before they met. Let alone voted. Later that day, Daphne, Fannie Willis held a press conference playing up the fact that the 19 defendants were accused who were accused had been charged by named ordinary citizens of the grand jury, although under Georgia law she could have filed the charges without a grand jury endorsing them since she claimed the indictment was, in fact, the work of the grand jury. The question is whether it was. From the moment the indictment was posted on the clerk’s official website that morning. Well, let’s move to the frenzied pace to get an indictment that night. Exactly what happened in that courtroom excuse me, in that grand jury room. What kind of deliberations occurred? Again, the issue is probable cause and whether the defendant’s due process rights were abridged. In Georgia, the grand jurors are free to speak publicly. We saw that earlier when in a prior investigative grand jury, the four men remember that woman went on TV after its proceedings concluded and would not stop talking about what occurred among grand jurors. And she did so gleefully. It should be difficult for defense counsel to get to the bottom of what occurred. And by the way, not just the president’s lawyers. Defense counsel for all. All the defendants. In the Manhattan case, when D.A. Alvin Bragg officially filed his indictment, he covered it with a prosecutor statement. That the media accepted his part of the grand jury indictment. It was certainly presented that way. The question is whether the grand jurors actually voted on it. New York imposes a secrecy requirement on grand jurors, but they requirement makes sense. While the grand jury is considering criminal charges, should it apply to prevent disclosure of how the prosecutor instructed the grand jury in the law and to discover whether the grand jurors did, in fact, consider whether there was probable cause to make the criminal allegation. And was Bragg’s accompanied statement part of the proceedings? Finally, in the second federal case supposedly involving January six, President Trump is not charged with insurrection or sedition. Yet when the special counsel Jack Smith, made his remarks announcing the indictment. Nearly half of his statement had no relevance to the charges brought by the grand jury. He said in part, and I quote. The indictment was issued by a grand jury of citizens here in the District of Columbia and sets forth the crimes charged in detail. I encourage everyone to read it in full. The attack on our nation’s capitol on January six was an unprecedented assault on the seat of American democracy. It’s described in the indictment. It was fueled by lies, lies by the defendant, targeted at obstructing a bedrock function of the U.S. government, the nation’s process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election. The men and women of law enforcement who defended the U.S. Capitol on January six are heroes. They’re patriots and they are the very best of us. They did not defend a building or the people sheltering in it. They put their lives on the line to defend who we are as a country and as a people. They defended the very institutions and principles that defined the United States and well. Again, this is a wide ranging public condemnation of the. Former president. In which Smith all but accuses the former president of insurrection and sedition for which he was not charged. Indeed, the charges are based on the 1871 Ku Klux Klan law, the post-Enron statute, and a financial fraud law that is used mostly in cases where contractors and others swindle the federal government. Exactly what information was presented to the grand jury in Washington. And what did Schmidt tell the grand jurors when they were urged to charge the former president? Did Smith use arguments about insurrection and sedition to persuade the grand jurors to vote for these other charges? This is a critical point. It appears that Smith played fast and loose with the law on the facts, which does not meet the requirements for bringing charges that meet the probable cause standard. The grand jury process is intended to protect an individual’s due process rights. Indictments are to be brought by ordinary citizens sitting as jurors. The governors provide the jurors with witnesses information and an explanation of the relevant law. So that the citizen jurors are making their decisions based on a true, accurate and honest presentment. When this process is violated by politically motivated prosecutors, as with Bragg and Willis, or a prosecutor with a long record of abusing the criminal justice system, as was Smith. It is especially important that the Fifth Amendment not be abused and violated and used not to protect an individual, but as a cudgel by the government intended to imprison his targets. That is their targets. It is relevant to note that all three prosecutors had the grand juries vote smack in the middle of a presidential election, and all have demanded trials within months of the indictments. That is for the maximum political damage to candidate Trump and maximum political benefit. The candidate Biden. The use of these grand juries, where there is obvious evidence of chicanery by these prosecutors, must be scrutinized at the front end of these various cases. That’s the question I have. Where the heck are the lawyers? Apparently this statement I make is upsetting some of the lawyers, Mr. Producer. Well, get off your ass and do something. At this juncture, the process is highly significant. In fact, listen, the Supreme Court has held that the defendant loses any right to challenge the grand jury process, at least at the federal level, once a trial is held on the indictment. So why don’t you start the trial and you haven’t raised. This issue. You are, as we lawyers called a stopped. From raising it later. So you got to raise it before the trial. This is why I put it out publicly. I don’t advise any of the lawyers for anybody. Unless I do it publicly where you read it. On radio where you hear it on TV, where you see it and hear it. A friend of mine contacted me today. About another idea. And it’s a great idea, but I’m going to wait for the next day or two to tell you about it. As you can see here, these trials are not only piling up, but these judges are willingly being used as pawns in the Biden Justice Department’s scheme. That is, these judges don’t have to hear these cases now. In fact, I cannot think of a single legitimate legal or constitutional reason that these judges have to hear these cases. In six months or eight months and can’t wait till after the election. I can think of a dozen political reasons. But not one single. Legitimate legal or constitutional reason. In 100 Biden case, they allow statutes of limitations to run. That’s not even possible with the allegations made against Donald Trump. Because those statute of limitations run through the election period.
Segment 4
I want to go back a buddy of mine contacted me and I’ve been in touch with a few otherwise. Normally I’m sitting here minding my own business. Things come over the transom. No, it’s not fair. I’m going to wait. You know, wait until this is explored further by the person who’s taken it up. So you don’t know what I’m talking about because it wouldn’t make sense if he did. So I’m talking to myself out loud. We’re going to wait. Vivek Ramaswamy is not who you think he is. I want to get into that next hour. I also want to get into something he said that he’s taking a lot of heat for, which is actually pretty close to the mark. As a matter of fact. He’s taking on the racist Marxists, at least rhetorically. And he’s calling them out. One of the rapes. This Marxist attacked him and he responded to her. I’ll get into some of that. But there’s also a piece. Which I can’t find right now, but I will find it. Um. Which is written by. Somebody who is highly regarded. In which it demonstrates that he became extremely wealthy in part through businesses that sold to and did business with communist Chinese companies. While at the same time he’s denouncing Big Pharma and others. He’s big tech, of course. For these very same things. Now this has all been boomed. That’s the problem. That’s why when he was on the program. This is why I don’t go with the mob. I don’t go with the common thinking. I think for myself. There’s just if something doesn’t seem right, maybe it’s not right.