Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Mark Levin’

Mark Levin: Democrats Want To End The American Republic


Mark Levin speaks about how the 2020 election is “crucial” to the future of the United States, arguing that Democrats want to pack the Supreme Court and add states to tip the balance of power in Congress to assume permanent power.

Recommended
X
Recommended Videos

MARK LEVIN: This is our country. This is our election. Everything is on the table here. The Democrats want to change this country, turn it into a post-Constitutional, post-Republican type of society. Bernie Sanders’ agenda is on the table. They’re not hiding it from us. They’re going to burn down the Supreme Court by packing it. This was tried before and denounced. They’re going to add four Democrat senators to the Senate, they’ll have the power to do it. They’re going to change the power to legislate so nothing can be slowed down.

Nothing can stop them. They want to change our electoral process so only Democrats have representation to elect a president. Rural and suburban areas — the areas of the country which produce the food and the energy will have no representation. This is not a joke.

This is serious as a heart attack. This is what the election is about. This is why the 1619 project exists, to brainwash and destroy the minds of our kids, brainwash them against this country. You’ve seen this in the streets. The presidential nominee of the Democratic party doesn’t even acknowledge the existence of Antifa – a Marxist, communist organization that says it wants to destroy our country and burn our streets.

This election is a big deal. If you’re on the fence, I don’t know what fence you’re sitting on.

If you’re leaning towards Joe Biden, he says, “I am the Democratic Party.” He ain’t kidding. If you’re leaning towards Joe Biden, this is what you’re going to get. There’s a reason he won’t tell you whether he supports stuffing the Supreme Court — because he does. There’s a reason he won’t tell you about the nominees he has in mind — because they are radicals. This election is crucial. Are you Thomas Paine? Are you Paul Revere? Now’s the time to speak up.

READ MORE AT https://www.conservativereview.com/

Top Liberal Lawyer Alan Dershowitz Shatters Democrats’ Impeachment Case “…It Would Be Void”


Posted By  |

URL of the original posting site: https://redrightvideos.com/top-liberal-lawyer-alan-dershowitz-shatters-democrats-impeachment-case-it-would-be-void/

Democrats are doing everything imaginable to try and impeach President Trump, but would it really be constitutional to do so? Law professor Alan Dershowitz says absolutely not!

Dershowitz recently sat down with Mark Levin and discussed the impeachment inquiry. Levin asked Dershowitz right out of the gate, “Should President Trump be impeached?”

“It would be unconstitutional for President Trump to be impeached on the current record. It would be an utter abuse of the power of Congress. The constitution sets out 4 criteria for impeaching a President, treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Unless one of those criteria is met, Congress does not have the authority to impeach and if they do their impeachment would be void. Alexander Hamilton said, “Any act of Congress that is inconsistent with the Constitution is void. Now Congress maybe can get away with impeaching because there won’t be judicial review, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t be violating their oath of office. They would be abusing their power if they impeach President Trump on this record.”

Levin then asked Dershowitz about briber and what it means to which he responded,

“It can’t operate when you’re the president of the United States and you’re conditioning or withholding money in order to make sure that a country isn’t corrupt and you’re asking them to investigate.”
That just doesn’t fit any definition of bribery — common law definition of bribery, statutory definition of bribery — however you define the constitutional word ‘bribery.’ It just doesn’t fit.”
They have Trump in their sights. They want to figure out a way of impeaching him and they’re searching for a crime.
“First, they came up with abuse of power — not a crime — it’s not in the Constitution. So now they’re saying ‘bribery,’ but they’re making it up. There is no case for bribery based on, even if all the allegations against the president were to be proved, which they haven’t been, but even if they were to be proved it would not constitute the impeachable offense of bribery. “

Ex-FEC Chair Indicates Trump Using Own Money to Pay Off Stormy Was Not Violation


Reported By Lisa Payne-Naeger | August 22, 2018 at

10:37am

Liberals across the nation are squirming in their seats with glee at the latest news that President Donald Trump’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, struck a plea deal with prosecutors that involved violating campaign finance laws related to a payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.

Not so fast.

As conservative talk radio star Mark Levin made clear Tuesday, through an interview with a former Federal Elections Commission chairman, the Cohen plea bargain is not exactly the slam dunk against Trump that it’s being portrayed by the mainstream media.

Cohen agreed to plead guilty to eight criminal counts of tax evasion (five counts), making a false statement to a financial institution (one count), and campaign finance violations (two counts), according to The Wall Street Journal.

It’s the campaign finance charges that have liberals going bananas. But Cohen only pleaded to them, Levin said, to avoid prosecution on even more charges.

“Prosecutors and Cohen cut a deal. It’s a plea bargain,” Levin said, according to Conservative Review. “It’s not a precedent. … They obviously had more on Michael Cohen, or Michael Cohen wouldn’t have cut a deal.”

More to the point, Levin said, Cohen’s guilty plea to campaign finance charges don’t mean there was an actual violation of the law. 

And it wasn’t just Levin. Bradley Smith, a Clinton-appointed member of FEC from 2000 to 2005 and its chairman in 2004, agreed.

Early in the interview with Levin, in response to a hypothetical situation Levin described, Bradley said a payment such as the one involving Cohen, which related to behavior that took place prior to a potential candidate’s political campaign, “should not be” considered a campaign violation

In the interview, Smith — the former chairman of the FEC, remember — makes the point over and over again that just the fact that an expenditure might help a candidate’s public image does not make every penny a candidate spends a matter of campaign finance law.

The whole interview is worth listening to, but the heart of Levin’s questioning comes about the 2:45 mark.

“The argument seems to be and it hasn’t changed is that if I spend money to make myself look better or to take away negative issues in my private life, my business life, my employment life, and use my own money, that somehow that is a campaign contribution, correct?”

Smith agrees, “Right.”

Levin confirms, “Which is it’s not.”

And Smith again validates, “That’s right, it’s not.”

Clearly, no matter Cohen might have agreed to to avoid other forms of prosecution, the alleged “campaign finance violation” is incredibly weak.

Then Levin, a constitutional lawyer who served in the Reagan Justice Department, went deeper to ask how much weight Cohen’s conviction would carry in future legal proceedings.

Smith’s answer, basically, was not much.

Levin asked: “Does this have judicial precedent? Stare decisis? Is it controlling in any way on any future case in that respect?”

“No, it’s not the same as if you had a judgment from the court,” he said. “Defining this as a campaign expenditure. It’s a plea bargain. People plea bargain for lots of reasons and one of the big reasons is that they plea bargain down to lesser charge to get a lesser penalty for pleading to something. …

“Sometimes they plea bargain to one charge because the penalty for that is less than the other thing they would be charged with. There are lots of reasons why people plea bargain, but bottom line is just as you said, it’s not judicial precedent that you can cite in court to prove the law of a case.”

The interview is loaded with reasons why the liberal media’s evident delight in Tuesday’s Cohen plea deal is as misplaced as all the media’s previous certainties that whatever the latest scandal was, it was going to be the one to bring Trump down.

Is it good news for the president that his former attorney has pleaded guilty to eight counts of criminal behavior? Obviously not.

But is it the legal crisis that Chuck Todd at MSNBC and the rest of the liberal media are pretending it is?

A guy who used to be in charge of the Federal Elections Commission doesn’t think so.

And he knows a little more about it than Chuck Todd.

Until such time as liberals come up with something of substance for to go after the present administration, it’s my opinion that there is probably a lot of really important news on which to focus.

And while we turn our attentions there, we can also enjoy a better economy, higher employment numbers and hopefully celebrate an upcoming confirmation of a constitutional conservative to the Supreme Court.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Summary

An enthusiastic grassroots Tea Party activist, Lisa Payne-Naeger has spent the better part of the last decade lobbying for educational and family issues in her state legislature, and as a keyboard warrior hoping to help along the revolution that empowers the people to retake control of their, out-of-control, government.

Media Celebrate Trump Mishandling $280k. Forget Obama Mishandled $88 Million.


Reported By Kara Pendleton | August 22, 2018 at

12:44pm

Another day, another “we’ve got him now. No, really, we’ve really, truly, madly, deeply got him, now!” series of headlines from the establishment media about President Donald Trump.

This time the focus is on campaign finance.

And once again, voters are left to their own devices to figure out what the truth really is and if there actually is a crime involved. Add to that the way the establishment media addressed the topic when President Barack Obama was involved in similar “scandals,” and you have more evidence as to why the establishment media outlets are so often called “fake news.”

The latest “Get Trump” establishment media feeding frenzy stems from a plea deal made by Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen. On Tuesday, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal charges against him, including two alleged campaign finance violations. One involved a payment of $130,000 in 2016 from then-candidate Trump to porn star Stormy Daniels. The other involved coordinating a $150,000 payment by the National Enquirer’s publisher to former Playboy model Karen McDougal, according to The Wall Street Journal.

A great breakdown of the situation comes from radio and television personality Mark Levin, who is also a lawyer and worked in the Justice Department during the Reagan administration.

Appearing on “Hannity,” Levin offered his “help to the “the law professors, the constitutional experts, the criminal defense lawyers, the former prosecutors, and of course the professors” in regards to “what the law is” surrounding the campaign finance issue and Michael Cohen plea deal.

“The general counsel for the Clinton Mob Family, Lanny Davis, he had his client plead to two counts of criminality that don’t exist. These campaign finance violations that they are saying all over TV implicates the president directly.”

“First, let’s back up. It’s a guilty plea. It is a plea bargain between a prosecutor and a criminal. A criminal who doesn’t want to spend the rest of his life in prison. That is not precedent. That applies only to that specific case,” Levin said.

“Nobody cites plea bargains for precedent. That’s number one.

“Number two: Just because a prosecutor says that somebody violated a campaign law, doesn’t make it so. He’s not the judge, he’s not the jury. We didn’t adjudicate anything–it never went to court. That’s number two.

“A campaign expenditure, under our federal campaign laws, is an expenditure solely for campaign activity. A candidate who spends his own money, or even corporate money, for an event that occurred not as a result of the campaign, it is not a campaign expenditure.”

Levin then gave some examples, one being a candidate for office having disputes with a vendor and not wanting the negative publicity. In this scenario, the hypothetical candidate instructs his private attorney to just pay the vendors and he (the candidate) will reimburse the attorney.”

Levin adds that this is “perfectly legal” and a “point” made that such an act would “influence an election” was “stupid.”

Earlier this year, Newsweek tackled the “the question of whether longtime Trump attorney Michael Cohen’s $130,000 hush money payment to adult actress Stormy Daniels was an illegal campaign contribution.”  Ex-Federal Election Commission Chairman Bradley Smith told Newsweek in March that, “It looks like Trump has made these kinds of payments to people before unrelated to his campaign or as a candidate. It’s hard to show this payment was made solely because he was running for election.”

By way of comparison as to how the media handled a “campaign finance scandal” when it came to Trump’s predecessor, let’s first ask if anyone was aware there even was one.

In one of the few mainstream media reports about it, a U.S. News & World Report headline from 2013 announced, “Obama Campaign Fined Big for Hiding Donors, Keeping Illegal Donations.”

The article went on to note that,The FEC levied one of its largest fines ever against Obama’s campaign committee, new documents show.” The Federal Election Commission fined his campaign $375,000 for “a failure to disclose or improperly disclosing thousands of contributions to Obama for America during the then-senator’s 2008 presidential run.”

More specifically, citing the FEC, the article stated that “the Obama campaign failed to disclose the sources of 1,300 large donations, which together accounted for nearly $1.9 million. Election Commission rules state campaigns must report donations of $1,000 or more within 20 days of Election Day.”

“Obama for America was also fined for ‘untimely resolution of excessive contributions,’ according to the conciliation agreement, FEC says,” the report continues. “The campaign accepted more than $1.3 million in contributions that came from donors who had already given $46,000 — the maximum allowed by FEC rules. The campaign eventually refunded the excess cash but did not do so within the 60-day window allotted for resolving such cases.

“In addition to failing to report big donors and excess donations in a timely manner, the Obama campaign incorrectly dated the filings dealing with $85 million in funds, the FEC claims. This error appears to have been primarily the result of one transfer to the campaign committee from the Obama Victory Fund, a fundraising group that includes money raised by the Democratic National Committee that is earmarked for the presidential race.”

Do you remember the media having a field-day with the news and screaming for Obama to be impeached?

Was anyone sent to jail over actual mishandling of actual campaign funds? (No Russians were implicated in the commission of those violations of federal election law, either.)

The sharp contrast between the two situations is undeniable.

To anyone with eyes to read, there is a distinct appearance of the establishment media using extreme measures to smear a sitting president and build public pressure for impeachment. Neither of which is the duty of a free press or an honorable Fourth Estate.

Conservative Radio Host Mark Levin Finally Dumps #NeverTrump to Jump on the Trump Train


waving flagBy Warner Todd Huston September 7, 2016

During his September 6 broadcast, conservative talk radio host and recent Trump detractor Mark Levin announced a change of direction saying he is now going to vote for Donald Trump for president. Not because he loves him some Trump, but because Hillary Clinton has to be stopped.

As he warmed to his tepid endorsement, and it was, indeed, a begrudging one, Levin reminded his audience that Trump is no conservative. For that matter, Levin also said we can’t even rely on Trump to stay on track with what he’s already said.

But saying this is “a binary election, at least for the country,” Levin endorsed Donald Trump. “Either Trump or Clinton will be president of the United States,” Levin said, He then went on to insist “I’m going to vote for Donald Trump” because “Hillary is so awful.”

Levin also noted that his pledge to vote for Trump should not be seen as a sudden blanket approval of everything Trump does or says.

“I take no responsibility for the dumb things he says,” Levin warned his audience, “or the dumb things his surrogates say. Just as I took no responsibility for the dumb things any candidate I vote for says. Whether it’s Congress, Senate Supervisor, State’s Attorney, other presidential candidates, I have no control over these people, I don’t run their campaigns and I don’t advise them.”

Ultimately for Mark Levin, the plain fact of the matter is that Hillary Clinton is simply too dangerous to the country to be allowed anywhere near the White House. Period. End of story.Never-Hillary-Egl-sm

This is quite a change from Levin’s past claims that he would never vote for Trump. However, his logic is pretty inescapable. The choice is Hillary — a woman who stands against everything American and who won’t allow conservatives to have any say at all in the nation’s governance — or Trump — an erratic self promoter who nonetheless will at least be receptive to things conservatives want (even if only a little receptive).

Levin joins fellow talk radio host Dennis Prager who months ago said he would never vote for Trump in a primary but would vote Trump if he became the GOP nominee because Hillary is the single worst, most dangerous candidate the Democrats ever floated for president. And after the anti-American Obama, that is really saying something.

For his part, Prager recently wrote a piece urging #NeverTrump fanatics to dump their opposition for the sake of the country.

Prager was especially dismissive of the #NeverTrumpers’ “conscience” argument, the idea that their refusal to support Trump means they can sleep with a clear conscience because they haven’t compromised their principles in order to vote for The Donald.

“I don’t find it compelling,” Prager wrote, “because it means that your conscience is clear after making it possible for Clinton or any other Democrat to win.”

The goal for every conservative, Prager said, is to defeat the left. That means we sometimes have to vote for flawed candidates, certainly. But we cannot flee the battle field and let the enemy win simply because we don’t have a flawless general. It is pushing the perfect at the expense of the good as far as Prager is concerned.

He also noted that political purity (or moral purity, by some people’s reckoning) is also not a compelling argument not to vote Trump.

In the 2016 presidential race, I am not interested in moral purity. I am interested in defeating the left and its party, the Democratic Party. The notion (expressed by virtually every #NeverTrump advocate) that we can live with another four years of a Democratic president is, forgive me, mind-boggling. To that end, with at least one, and probably multiple, additional leftists on the Supreme Court, a Republican presidential victory in 2020 would mean little. All the left needs is the judicial branch, especially the Supreme Court. Left-wing judges pass so many left-wing laws that they render those who control Congress, and even the White House, almost irrelevant.AMEN

This is eminently logical reasoning.

In fact, it is the #NeverTrumpers who are steeping in illogical reasoning.

never hillary clintonOf course, the anti-Trump folks on the right are most certainly right about how ill-fitting Trump is both for the conservative cause and the White House itself. Just as Mark Levin said, Trump is not a conservative. In fact, he’s barely a Republican at all. He has no history of supporting conservatism and it is clear he has no intellectual understanding (or interest in) the movement.

But let’s look at the #NeverTrumper argument. They insist they are sick and tired of being treated as the redheaded step child by the GOP. They have had it, they say, with being ignored and their voices not listened to. It is time the Republican Party listened to the voice of the people, they sonorously intone.

OK, fine. So, what was their answer during the primaries — and for some even now? They want to run some guy who no one voted for at all and ignore the voices of the millions of regular people who voted for Trump.

How is that any different than what they claim they have suffered at the hands of the GOP?

There is also no logic in the claim of #NeverTrumpers that Trump is so bad that he’ll ruin the country.

To imagine Trump could ever be worse than an extremist like Hillary who has dedicated her life to destroying everything that makes America great is sophistry at its worst.

The truth is, while Trump is no conservative, he is also not a doctrinaire anti-American like Obama and Hillary.

Where Trump differs from Obama and Hillary is that is the latter two candidates have for their entire history prior to running for the White House shown they are stiff-necked, unbendable, anti-Americans. They are extremist, socialist-styled, doctrinaire left-wingers whose entire life previous to the White House proved they would do their level best to tear down the U.S.A.

While it is true all of Trump’s current center right supporters are ignoring his liberal past just as moderates ignored Obama’s in 2008 and 2012, the difference between Obama and Trump is that Trump is no agenda-pushing, America-hating, leftist like Obama is. Trump is just a run-of-the-mill liberal without any doctrinaire communist passion behind his assumptions. Where Obama passionately believes in his socialist doctrine and feels the U.S. needs to be punished because of it, Trump is just a guy who grew up being fed liberal pap and he accepts it at face value without ever having put any time and intellect into examining it all. Trump’s liberalism is just received wisdom spoon fed at birth, not a cause to punish the country at any cost.

It seems clear that Trump won’t work specifically to undermine the Constitution, the law, and the American way of life as Obama has done and as Hillary will continue to do. While a President Trump may end up hurting those great things around the edges here and there, at the very least it won’t be his goal to tear those things down like it has been Obama’s and will be Hillary’s.

Trump is also a capitalist and, unlike Obama, Trump understands that the U.S.A. is great because of private capitalism, not despite it as Obama thinks.

So, with a President Trump we’d get a general liberal who has no left-wing cause to push but who is also a booster of capitalism.

In that respect, if Trump were to become president, it wouldn’t be anywhere near as terrible as it would be if Hillary Clinton were to win the White House.

Finally, I’d like to reiterate that if Hillary wins the White House conservatives and Republicans will have no say whatever in how the country is run. Even if the GOP maintains control of the House and Senate their tepid “leadership” will allow Hillary to get away with most if not nearly all of her destructive agenda.

On the other hand, the fight in the Republican Party is never stirred more than when it has a leader of its own to defeat! If Hillary wins you’ll see the linguini spine of the GOP reign supreme. But if Trump wins, you’ll suddenly find Republicans with the gumption to stand up and fight.

So, if you are worried that Trump will become a dictator, stop being foolish. History shows that it is impossible for someone center right to become a dictator in the U.S.A.

I’ll leave you today with Denis Prager’s list of nine reasons you must vote for Trump:

  • Prevent a left-wing Supreme Court.
  • Increase the defense budget.
  • Repeal, or at least modify, the Dodd-Frank act.
  • Prevent Washington, D.C. from becoming a state and giving the Democrats another two permanent senators.
  • Repeal Obamacare.
  • Curtail illegal immigration, a goal that doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with xenophobia or nativism (just look at Western Europe).
  • Reduce job-killing regulations on large and small businesses.
  • Lower the corporate income tax and bring back hundreds of billions of offshore dollars to the United States.
  • Continue fracking, which the left, in its science-rejecting hysteria, opposes.

And I’d say these are the least of the reasons.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Warner Todd Huston

Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com and BigJournalsim.com along with all Breitbart News sites, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, and many, many others. He has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs across the country to discuss his news stories and current events and has appeared on TV networks such as CNN, Fox News, Fox Business Network, and various Chicago-based news programs. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

Limbaugh: Trump Lost Iowa with Pledge to ‘Deal’ with Democrats


waving flagby Joel B. Pollak2 Feb 2016, 2 Feb, 2016 2 Feb, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/02/rush-limbaugh-donald-trump-iowa 

Limbaugh was careful to praise Trump for leading the media fight: “We have a very strong outsider in Donald Trump, who is showing the way in illustrating how to oppose the establishment and what not to be afraid of.”

However, he said that Trump erred by promising to compromise with the left:

“In a Republican primary, you do not win if you’re going to sound like a liberal Democrat criticizing Ted Cruz. And it wasn’t just health care. How many of you remember (I pointed this out when it happened) Mr. Trump pointing out that you can’t do anything if you can’t make deals, can’t cooperate? Part of his criticism of Ted Cruz is he’s hated; nobody likes him. Trump said, “I can do deals with’

“Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Pelosi. I know these people. I like these people. Schumer? I can do deals.” No, no, no, no! We don’t want to do any more deals with these people. We want to beat those people. There are many things that harm Mr. Trump, but not showing up at the debate is not one of them.”

This author offered a similar analysis at the time Trump made the remark a week ago, saying he had given Cruz a “closing argument”: “What Trump misses is how much the conservative base loathes both the GOP establishment and the Democrats. Trump’s pledge to be a deal-maker is also poorly timed, coming at a moment when Cruz is challenging his conservative credentials. Trump has yet to resolve those doubts: it is too early to talk about deals.”

On Tuesday, citing exit poll data, Limbaugh argued that conservatives candidates had done best in Iowa–clearly placing Trump outside of that group.

“This is asking people, “Does this candidate share my values?” This is an ideological question, in my estimation. I think this indicates that 5% of the voters that went in there last night and caucused think Trump shares their values as a conservative. Thirty-eight percent think that of Cruz, and 21% think that of Rubio. Now, if you add Cruz and Rubio, if you add their totals, you get 51% of the vote….’

“That’s 51% of the vote. Trump 24% of the vote. If you want to you can add Ben Carson, who’s demonstrably conservative, and you’re up to 60% of the vote in the Hawkeye Cauci was for conservatives. It works every time it’s tried, is my point. Conservatism wins every time it’s tried. When somebody tries to fake it, real conservatives are gonna spot it and it isn’t gonna fly.”

Limbaugh later added that while Trump had excited voters, and provided a “vessel” for their anger at Washington, Cruz had helped give voice to that anger in the first place, aiming it at Obamacare and the establishment.

In addition, Limbaugh talked up the prospects of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who finished a strong third behind Cruz and Trump in Iowa. While he was becoming the establishment’s preferred choice, and erred by participating the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill, he was one of the candidates that he could support, Limbaugh implied.

Trump used early support from talk radio and other conservative media to help build his campaign, though some seem to have expected that Trump would fade or bow out in favor of Cruz.

Regardless, the Iowa result virtually ensures a good season of ratings and traffic–and reaffirms conservative media’s high importance to the Republican primary.

no more rinos Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

It’s On: Rep. Mark Meadows Makes Move To Unseat John Boehner As Speaker Immediately


by Matthew Boyle 28 Jul 2015Washington, DC

Yet another rebellion against Speaker is brewing among Republicans in the House of Representatives, and has now burst into public view.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC)

96%
Liberty Score
Voting Record
A
96%
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) has filed a motion aimed at unseating Boehner immediately as Speaker of the House.

“Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) has filed a motion to try to force Speaker John Boehner from his leadership post,” Politico wrote in a breaking news alert. “The move, called a motion to vacate the chair, represents a new level of opposition to GOP leadership from the conservative wing of the House Republican Conference. The motion can be postponed for several days before consideration.”

It’s unclear if this will be successful, but over the past few years there have been two major coup attempts at Boehner. Both were unsuccessful—but extraordinarily close to succeeding—and centered around plays at the beginning of this Congress and the beginning of the last Congress.

This move will focus on centering around a different strategy, and it all comes after Boehner’s leadership team unsuccessfully attempted retaliation against Meadows for opposing Obamatrade. They had tried to pull a subcommittee chairmanship from Meadows—and did so, but then reversed themselves under enormous pressure from the GOP conference and the American people, turning Meadows into a conservative movement hero of sorts.

Boehner’s office has not immediately responded to a request for comment but conservative movement stalwarts including nationally syndicated radio host Mark Levin have called for his ouster in recent days.

Meadows is a highly respected conservative member of the House and is intricately involved in the House Freedom Caucus. He’s plugged in party-wide, and wouldn’t be doing this if he didn’t think it could be successful.

Read the full motion to vacate the chair, filed by Rep. Meadows, here: MEADOWS

freedom combo 2

Mark Levin on Ferguson: ‘What We Are Witnessing Now Is the Left’s War on the Civil Society’


by 25 Nov 2014

 From Mark Levin’s Facebook page:

Ferguson burns and violence has been unleashed thanks to the reckless liberal media, the lawless administration (especially Eric Holder) exploiting the shooting to smear police departments across the nation, phony civil rights demagogues, race-baiting politicians, and radical hate groups.

The lies about why and how Officer Darrin Wilson shot Michael Brown started on day one and never ended. The indisputable facts are that Brown was shot because he assaulted a police officer, attempted to take the officer’s pistol resulting in two close range gun shots in the police cruiser, and then turned around and charged the officer as he was being pursued. The entire event was precipitated by Brown earlier stealing cigars from a local store and assaulting the owner.

What we are witnessing now is the left’s war on the civil society. It’s time to speak out in defense of law enforcement and others trying to protect the community and uphold the rule law.

By WhatDidYouSay.org

By WhatDidYouSay.org

Mark Levin: ‘Have You Noticed Nothing Really Works Under This President?’


Obamacare

By Susan Jones / October 2, 2014 – 6:35 AM

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/mark-levin-have-you-noticed-nothing-really-works-under-president

(CNSNews.com) – “[H]ave you noticed really works under this president, from the Secret Service to immigration to the economy?” conservative mark levintalk-radio host Mark Levin asked Fox News’s Sean Hannity Wednesday night.

“Is there anything this president, from your perspective, has done well?” Hannity asked Levin.

“No. There’s not a thing he’s done well,” Levin replied. “And here’s the problem, Sean. People who support big government, centralized government, liberalism — well, congratulations, you have it. And it’s an absolute disaster.’

“And here’s what’s remarkable to me. He doesn’t go back and actually look at something, have some circumspection, say, You know, we’re going to fix Obamacare. Let’s pull back. Maybe we bit off more than we can chew. It’s full speed ahead, the foot on the gas pedal.”

SEE THE RECORDING OF THE INTERVIEW BELOW:

http://www.mrctv.org/embed/129666http://www.mrctv.org/videos/levin-obama-theres-not-thing-hes-done-well”>mark

“Now it’s going to be executive imperial fiats for amnesty! He’s looking for all these other areas where he can nationalize what shouldn’t be nationalized, where he’s undermining what shouldn’t be undermined. It’s just like one thing after another after another!’

“This guy does not want to be president. This guy continues to be that community organizer, or disorganizer…sitting in the Oval Office, throwing political mudballs in every direction he possibly can!’

“Have you noticed when he’s happiest?” Levin asked. “He’s happiest when he’s campaigning, trashing Republicans, trashing conservatives, trashing capitalism, trashing the Constitution. That’s right. He’s never really happy doing the job he’s supposed to do!”

Hannity asked Levin about Obama, in a “60 Minutes” interview, blaming his national intelligence director for underestimating the ability of ISIS/ISIL “to reconstitute themselves and take advantage of that chaos” in remote areas of Syria.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/obama-says-his-natl-intellig…

“It is my contention that the president of the United States right now is in a full-blown cover-up. That’s why he went to his favorite ’60 Minutes’ correspondent, Steve Kroft. That’s why he blamed his intelligence agencies for this,” Levin said.

“This has nothing to do with the intelligence agencies. It has to do with the intelligence between his ears! And the fact of the matter is, he’s not paying attention to his job! He’s not attentive to what a president’s supposed to be attentive to because he’s so busy revolutionizing our economy and our government and transforming it, he’s not doing his job!”

Levin wondered if Obama is even reading his intelligence briefings when he reportedly has skipped 60 percent of the face-to-face meetings to discuss those briefings.

“It’s time to hold him to account,” Levin said, noting that some of the information passed along to Obama shows up in newspapers. “The country’s falling apart! It’s unraveling! Everything you look at is a mess! It’s time to pin him down on something! And this is life and death. This is war and peace.’

“And by the way, while we’re at it, Congress declares war! Will John Boehner and Mitch McConnell draw up a declaration of war, or are we going to continue to allow this president to conduct himself — and let me be very clear, and I don’t mean to be provocative about this — he is now fighting a political war! These pinpricks are not stopping ISIS. ISIS is about to conquer Baghdad. It’s on the move on the Turkish border. It’s more powerful this month than it was last month, despite our bombing raids.’

“Obama has the military on a short leash. Now, let’s let them off the leash. Let’s declare war. And let’s defeat them. This is World War III, and we need World War II tactics.”

Article collective closing

Mark Levin On What To Do With Illegals: “Turn Em Around, Kick Em In The Ass, And Send Em Home”


http://dailyrushbo.com/mark-levin-on-what-to-do-with-illegals-turn-em-around-kick-em-in-the-ass-and-send-em-home/

mark levin

Complete MessageArticle collective closing

 

Levin Calls on Tea Party to Fight Tyranny in USA


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/02/27/Mark-Levin-Tea-Party-Last-Line-of-Defense-Against-Tyranny-of-Runaway-Gov-t

by Tony Lee  27 Feb 2014, 11:25 AM PDT

Keynoting an event honoring the five-year anniversary of the Tea Party on Thursday, conservative scholar and talk radio host Mark Levin said that the Tea Party movement is the only thing standing between what is left of the country’s republic and the tyranny of runaway government.

Levin said the government that is supposed to serve the people is “devouring” us, while the Constitution’s firewalls are being breached by a lawless president, a feckless Congress, and an all-powerful Supreme Court.

He said it was an honor to speak in front of the Tea Party and thanked those in the movement for having the “spirit and enthusiasm of the founding fathers” and not being afraid to insist “on the federal government’s compliance with the constitution’s limits.”

Levin said that for this, the Tea Party is “smeared and attacked by the ruling class, Democrats and Republicans alike,” in addition to the media and “countless others who are dragging the nation into the abyss.”

Levin said that, under this assault, it is understandable for those fighting for liberty to want to live quiet lives with family and friends and wonder “if it is worth it” and “if it will be able to reverse course.” But he said that he also knew “you are Americans. You cannot be idle. And you will not be silent while a relative handful of self-aggrandizing masterminds seek to lord over you and your fellow citizens.”

“You will not allow your country to fail,” Levin declared.

Levin said that those in George Washington’s Continental Army, before they crossed the Delaware, read Thomas Paine, whom President Ronald Reagan always read and quoted on the stump and to his advisers.

Levin quoted from Paine’s The American Crisis about these being the “times that try men’s soul” and “the harder the conflict the more glorious the triumph. Triumph we must and triumph we will.”

He emphasized that Reagan was an outsider who was not a part of the establishment and who had the “courage to stand up and be counted.” And like today’s Tea Party, Reagan was blasted by George Will, Nelson Rockefeller – who Levin quipped runs today’s Republican party – and the Wall Street Journal. Levin read their disparaging attacks on Reagan before he went on to win two landslide victories and defeat the Soviet Union.

Levin, who campaigned and worked for Reagan, said that Reagan would have stood before the Tea Party and thanked them for all that they have done. He said Reagan would have been “enormously proud” of the movement and reminded those in attendance of Reagan’s words about freedom being just one generation away from extinction. Levin said that the Tea Party movement is “astutely aware of the peril of the moment and all that is at stake.”

Levin will also be honored with the inaugural “Andrew Breitbart Defender of the First Amendment Award” at this year’s CPAC on Thursday, March 6.

As Breitbart News has reported, Levin’s monumental book, Liberty and Tyranny, sold over a million copies even though the mainstream media did not discuss or review it. The book presaged the Tea Party movement and was published shortly after Obama took office in 2009, and it predicted much of Obama’s statist agenda. Like the Tea Party movement and Levin, “it circumvented the legacy press to make a lasting impact. The success of the book also proved that the mainstream press are no longer the sole gatekeepers in today’s media environment.”

Jeffrey Lord, a conservative writer for the American Spectator and former Reagan administration official, also spoke at the event and said that nobody has done more to bring awareness to the meaning of the Constitution than Levin. Lord called Levin a “national treasure” and said “we owe him a considerable debt of gratitude.”

See video of event here;

Levine Tea Party

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: