MARK: HELLO AMERICA, I AM
MARK LEVIN THIS IS "LIFE,
LIBERTY AND LEVIN."
THIS IS A POCKET COPY OF THE
CONSTITUTION AND DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, I SPENT 40
OF INDEPENDENCE, I SPENT 40
YEARS IN MY LIFE STUDIESDING
THIS.
WHY IS THAT?
BECAUSE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO
BE THE OVERALL LAW OF THE
LAND.
IT PROTECTS OUR
INDIVIDUALITY, FREEDOM AND
CIVIL SOCIETY, IN MANY WAYS
WE LIVE IN A POST
CONSTITUTIONAL AMERICA,
THOSE WHO ARE WAVING THE
CONSTITUTION TODAY TO
JANUARY 6 COMMITTEE HAVE
BEEN MAYOR PARTICIPANTS IN
ITS DEMISE.
LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION.
LET’S SAY YOU GO TO A COURT
OF LAW.
THERE IS NO JUDGE.
THERE IS NO JURY.
YOU DON’T HAVE A LAWYER. YOU CAN’T CALL WITNESSES.
YOU CAN’T CALL WITNESSES.
YOU CAN’T PROVIDICDIC
EVIDENCE, YOU HAVE TO WATCH.
AND WATCH. AND LET’S SAY THAT JURY
AND LET’S SAY THAT JURY
CHOSEN BY.
LET’S SAY THE JURY IS CHOSEN
BY NANCY PELOSI, AND MEDIA
IN THE BACK TAKING PICTURES,
ROLLING CAMERAS, TAKING
NOTES, AS SCRIBES.
FOR THE PROSECUTION.
THE PROSECUTION BEING THE
JURY.
THEN REPORTING, WE HAVE NEW
FINDINGS, NEW INFORMATION
HAS COME OUT.
NOT A PERFECT PARALLEL BUT
GOOD ENOUGH, THAT IS WHAT IS
GOING ON WITH THIS JANUARY 6
COMMITTEE, NANCY PELOSI
CHOSE EVERY MEMBER, THEY HAD
TO PASS YORE TEST -- HER
TEST, WHICH WAS LOYAL TIE TO
HER, NANCY PELOSI HAS BEEN
BEEN QUESTIONED ONCE ABOUT
YORE ROLE IN JANUARY 6 OR
HER FRAIL LURE TOFAILURE TO
DEFENDED THE CAPITOL
BUILDING, SHE WAS IN CHARGE,
HER TEXT-MESSAGES, E-MAILS,
DOCUMENTS, STAFF, FAMILY
MEMBERS, FRIENDS, NONE OF
THEM HAVE BEEN CALLED OR
QUESTIONS, NANCY PELOSI
CHOSE THESE 9 COMMITTEE
MEMBERS IN PART TO COVER-UP
FOR HERSELF, SO SHE WOULD
NOT BE HELD TO ACCOUNT,
NANCY PELOSI IS MOST DES
DESTRUCTIVE SPEAKER IN THE
HOUSEWIFEHOUSE HOUSE THAT
WE’VE HAD.
NANCE NAFNS HASNANCY PELOSI
VISIT BEEN GIVEN MANY
OPPORTUNITIES WHEN PRESS
ASKS HER, SHE GETS
IRRITATED, SHE URGES ON THE
MOB.
WHICH WILL BE IN FULL FORCE
SOON ENOUGH WHO ROE V. WHEN
ROE V. WADE IS OVERTURNED
LIKELY, SHE DOES NOT SEEM TO
BE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AND
NEITHER DOES SCHUMER AND
BIDEN.
THE PRESIDENT OF UNITED
STATES, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
UNITED STATES FORMER JUDGE,
WAS VERY SLOW TO PROVIDE
PROTECTION FOR THE JUSTICES,
WE HAVE THE GOVERNOR OF
VIRGINIA, TRYING TO PASS,
WHICH WOULD MAKE IT A CRIME
TO PRO THEFT PROTEST IN
FRONT OF OR THREAT SUPREME
COURT JUSTICES, THAT IS
WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW, I
WATCHED THE THIRD HEARING
FOR 45 MINUTES, I THOUGHT TO
MYSELF, I HAVE NEVER SEEN
ANYTHING LIKE THIS BEFORE.
IT ISER CHOREOGRAPHS,
MEMBERS ARE READING OFF TILL
PROMPTTELEPROMPTERS, ONE IS
R-8IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
LEADING THE HEARING, HIGH
KNOWHE KNOWS WHEN TO STOP SO
THE CAMERAS ARE ROLLING.
WE HAVE WHAT IS CALLED
SEPARATION OF POWERS.
THEY KEEP TALKING ABOUT A
COOP. AND AN INSURRECTION.
AND AN INSURRECTION. THIS IS NO CINCINNATI.
THIS IS NO CINCINNATI.
>> THEY KNOW ABOUT UP COUP.
THERE WAS A PIECE WRITTEN
OVER A YEAR AGO BY PROFESSOR
MULLER FROM UNIVERSITY OF
IOWA, HE WAS ANNOYED WHILE
LISTENING TO AND WATCHING
DEMOCRATS SOME TIME AGO.
THE PIECE IS ENTITLED,
DEMOCRATS HAVE BEEN
SHAMELESS ABOUT YOUR PRESIDENTIAL VOTE TOO, IN
PRESIDENTIAL VOTE TOO, IN
RELEVANT PART IN JANUARY
2001 --
>>
>> OF TEXAS, REFERRED TO
QUITE MILLIONS OF AMERICAN
WHO HAVE BEEN DISEN CRAN DISENFRANCHISED BY FLOOD A
DISENFRANCHISED BY FLOOD A
CROATFLORIDA VOTE COUNT.
AND IN 2005, SENATOR BOXER
FROM CALIFORNIA JOINED
SENATOR JOANS FROM OHIO.
TO LAUNCH A FORMAL
OBJECTION.
COMPELLING CONGRESS TO SPEND
TWO HOURS IN DEBATE.
REPRESENTATIVE BARBARA LEE
OF CALIFORNIA CLAIMS THAT
DEMOCRATIC PROCESS WAS
FORWARDED.
AND ED THAT NADLER FROM NEW
YORK SAYING THAT RIGHT TO
VOTE WAS STOLEN.
AND ALSO A DARK PICTURE OF
THE PRESIDENCY OF GEORGE
BUSH.
JANUARY OF 2017, DEMOCRAT IN
CONGRESS AGAINST CHALLENGE
THE ELECTION ARE ON OUTCOME.
SAYING:: LEE OF CALIFORNIA ARGU
THAT MICHIGAN ELECTORATE
VOTE SHOULD BE THROWN OUT
BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE HORRIFIED
OF THE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE
AND CITING THE MALFUNCTION
OF THE VOTING MACHINES.
READINESS WAS DISCONCERTING.
TWO COMMITTEE MEMBERS WERE
INVOLVED IN OBJECTIONS THAT
INCLUDES THE CHAIRMAN, BENNY
THOMSON AND SO-CALLED CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT, JAME
CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT, JAME
IJAIME RAS -- WE HAVE NOT
HAD WITNESSERS ON TESTIMONY
IN DEFENSE OF PEOPLE SMEARED
IN FRONT OF A NATIONAL MEDIA
EVERY TIME THIS COMMITTEE
MEETS, THEY PUT OUT A
NARRATIVE.
WE’RE TOLD THEY ARE DEBATING
WHETHER TO MAKE A CRIMINAL
DEFERRAL TO DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, SEVERAL MEMBERS LET
THE CAT OUT OF BAG, AND SAY
THEIR ENTIRE PURPOSE IS TO
INDICT DONALD TRUMP.
VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES, WHAT IS HIS POWER AS
PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE?
WE RAIL REALLY DON’T KNOW.
IF YOU READ 12 AMENDMENT OF
THE CONSTITUTION IT DOES NOT
TELL YOU VERY MUCH.
1887 LAW THAT EVERYONE
POINTS TO IS CONVOLUTED.
AMBIGUOUS.
THIS IS WHY PEOPLE ARE
DEBATING THIS ISSUE, I DO
KNOW THIS, EVERYONE TAKES AN
OATH TO UP HOLD THE
CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED
STATES, INCLUDING PRESIDENT
OF THE SENATE, VICE
PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.
I KNOW WHAT ARTICLE TWO
SECOND ONE CLAUSE 2 SAYS, I’VE STATE SHALL APPOINT IN
I’VE STATE SHALL APPOINT IN
SUCH MANNER AS LINL LEDGE
LEGISLATURE.
THEY TALK ABOUT WHICH BRANCH
IS TO BE IN CONTROL.
YOU KNOW WHY THEY NEVER
TALK.
ARTICLE 2 IS VIOLATED.
OPENLY.
IN SUNLIGHT AND BEFORE OUR
EYES, WHEN THE MAJORITY
DEMOCRAT ELECTED SUPREME
COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CHANGED THE ELECTION LAWS UP
TO A WEEK BEFORE THE
ELECTION.
WHEN THE GOVERNOR OF
PENNSYLVANIA, AND SECRETARY
OF STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA,
CHANGED HOW THE ELECTION
LAWS WERE INSTITUTED.
IN VIOLATION OF THIS
ARTICLE, EVEN THOUGH THE
REPUBLICAN LEGISLATURE
OBJECTED TO WHAT THEY WERE
DOING, OBJECTED TO WHAT THEY
WERE DOING.
AND SO LAWSUIT WERE BROUGHT.
THEY WERE BROUGHT IN COURT.
THE SUPREME COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA THAT VIOLATED
FEDERAL CONSTITUTION RULED
ON IT.
U.S. SUPREME COURT REFUSES
TO TAKE IT UP, IT APPEARS
THAT 3 JUSTICES WANT WANT TO
TAKE IT UP, IT TAKES 4, UP
LIKE 2000 WHEN ALE GORE WAS
AL GORE WAS TRYING TO
LITIGATE HIS WAY TO THE
WHITE HOUSE, REHNQUIST SAID
THAT ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
BECAUSE THE ROGUE FLORIDA
SUPREME COURT COMMENT -- IS
IT YOUR DUTY, AS PRESIDENT
OF THE SENATE OVERSEEING THE
PROCESS AND VICE PRESIDENT
OF UNITED STATES, TO ACCEPT
THE COUNTING OF ELECTORS
EVEN IF YOU KNOW THE FEDERAL
CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN
VIOLATED?
DIDN’T YOU TAKE AN OCEAN TO
OATH, DOESN’T THIS SUPERCEDE
EVERYTHING ELSE?
I’M NOTE BRINGING IT UP TO
-- NOT BRINGING IT UP TO
CRITICIZE ANYONE, I AM
BRINGING IT UP THIS MATTER
IS MORE COMPLICATED.
THEY SEEK TO CREATE CRIMINAL
PREDICATES THAT DONALD TRUMP
KNEW THAT VICE PRESIDENT
PENCE KNEW HE COULDN’T DO
WHAT ME WANTED TO DO.
BUT HE CREPT THREATENING,
THEY ARE TRYING TO CREATE A
CRIMINAL PREDICATE, HE HAD
TO KNOW HIS HIS LAWYERS WERE
TELLING HIM.
THAT IS NOT CLEAR AT ALL.
EITHER WAY.
SO THIS ENTIRE THING IS A
SCAM, A RAILROAD JOB, THAT
IS MY POINT.
ONE OTHER POINT, MICHAEL
TESTIFYING A FORMER FEDERAL
JUDGE, WHY?
WHAT DOES HE HAVE TO DO WITH
ANYTHING.
HIS TESTIMONY WAS BIZARRE.
MANNERISMS WERE BIZARRE.
HE TESTIFIED BECAUSE HE IS
CONSIDERED THIS ICON ON THE
CONSERVATIVE SIDE WITH THE
FEDERALIST SOCIETY, WHICH
THEY HATE.
HE TESTIFIED BECAUSE OF HIS
CONNECTION TO VICE PRESIDENT
PINS, HEPRESIDENT PENCE.
HE WAS A LEGAL ADVISER TO
PENCE AT THIS PERIOD, BUT HE
WASN’T.
TOLD ME, MICHAEL WAS NOTE A
NOT A LAWYER FOR THE VICE
PRESIDENT OR AN ADVISER, HE
SENT UNSOLICITED, MEMO OF
HIS VIEWS ON THE LAW TO THE
VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES.
HE NEVER SPOKE TO THE VICE
PRESIDENT ACCORDING TO THIS
SIGN WHY SENIOR AID, TO VICE
PRESIDENT MIKE PENCE, IT
WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE IF HIGH
IF HE WERE EXAMINED ON THAT
ISSUE, BILL BARR IS NOW
CELEBRATED THEY WILL HAVE A
TICKER-TAPE PARADE FOR HIM
ON HIS TESTIMONY, THEY WANT
HIM TO BE KEY WENT ON A
CRIMINAL TRIAL, WHERE HE
SAID, EVERY THAT TRUMP SAID
WAS BS.
BECAUSE I KNOW.
HE CAN CONTRADICTED BY
FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY FOR
PHILADELPHIA WHO SAID ON
ELECTION DAY AND AFTERNOON
WORDS OUR OFFICE RECEIVED
VARIOUS ALLEGATIONS OF
VOTARY FRAUD AND ELECTIONER
IRREGULARLY, I WANTED TO TO
TO BE TRAN PERSON, ATTORNEY
GENERAL HOWEVER
INSTRUCTIONED MY TO NOT MAKE
PUBLIC STATEMENTS OR PUT OUT
PRESS RELEASES, I WAS GIVEN
A DIRECTIVE TO PASS ALONG
ALLEGATION TO STATE ATTORNEY
GENERAL FOR INVESTIGATION,
SAME ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO
DECLARED THAT YOU COULD NOT
WIN.
I DISAGREED WITH THAT
DECISION, BUT THOSE WERE MY
ORDERS.
IN A NORMAL COMMITTEE
HEARING, EVEN A SUBCOMMITTEE
OVERLOOKING AGRICULTURAL
SUBSIDIES.
YOU WOULD HAVE MORE
OPPOSITION THAN YOU HAVE IN
THIS COMMITTEE, WHICH IS
NONE.
YOU PUT THE FORMER U.S.
ATTORNEY IN ONE CHAIR, AND
FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL IN
THE OTHER CHAIR, YOU SWEAR
THEM YOU UNDER OATH, THEY
GIVE TESTIMONY AND THEY LOOK
AT EACH OTHER, YOU WORK IT
OUT RIGHT THERE IN FRONT OF
THE COMMITTEE AND IN FRONT
OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, BUT
YOU GET NONE OF THAT, THAT
IS NOT WHAT NANCY PELOSI
WANTS, MEDIA HAVE TO STOP
TAKING THE SPOON FED
PROPAGANDA FROM THIS
COMMITTEE, IT MIGHT HAS WELL
BE RUN BY DEMOCRAT NATIONAL
COMMITTER I, PHONY LEGAL
ANALYSTS SHOULD STOP
RETRENDING -- PRESENTING WE