Mark Levin Delivers Powerful Monologue on GOP Candidates, Where We Stand

January 20, 2016

Editor

Radio commentator Mark Levin articulated something in a monologue Glenn has been trying to say for a long time.

"You'll notice he's being much smarter than I am," Glenn said on radio Wednesday.

In his monologue, Levin pointed out he defended Donald Trump when the "morons in the establishment" were attacking him. However, as a conservative, he said he'd never defend everything the candidate has done, given Trump's self-described "transitions."

"We're not making the transition," Glenn said. "Trump is the one making these transitions, or so he says. I thought that was really telling and very powerful coming from Mark Levin."

Listen to the segment or read the transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

GLENN: I want to play a little of this monologue from Mark Levin, who I have to tell you, listeners used to always say, "You and Mark have got to get together. You have so much in common." Blah, blah. And there was this bullcrap between us that somebody had, quite honestly, lied about me and was feeding him stuff that apparently that I was saying behind his back or whatever. And none of it happened. And the same person was trying to feed that garbage to me. And until we started talking, we realized, "Oh, my gosh, we have been played. We have been played." To keep us apart. And it was not just him. It was all of the talk radio people. Just try to keep us apart. Because if we would ever gather together, it would be -- it would be, you know -- political changes would be in the air.

So Mark and I over the past year or so have become very good friends. So we write to each other a few times a week. And I write to him. And he'll send me articles, et cetera, et cetera. And he's just wickedly smart. And he's right. I really, truly believe Mark Levin's idea of the Convention of States may be the last-ditch effort. It may be the only way to save the republic in the end. Because if one of three people get elected, I think we're headed for a dictatorship or dictatorship-lite. We're headed for something that does not resemble the republic because they will finish the transformation that Barack Obama started. And the Convention of the States will be the only way to reel it back in.

So, you know, I've been trying to pay attention to what he's saying because he's really super smart. I listen to a monologue this morning when I got up from a couple of days ago, that he gave. And I want you just to hear what he is now saying about the candidates and where we are.

MARK: I want to make it clear, when Trump was under attack by the morons in the establishment, I defended him. I didn't defend everything he said, and I'm never going to. I'm never going to defend everything that man's done, every contribution he's made, everything he's said, or I wouldn't be a conservative, now would I? It's he who has evolved or transitioned, he says. So that's worth looking at. What's different --

GLENN: Stop. Have you noticed that? He is being far more diplomatic than I have been. And we all know where Mark stands. Mark has been very, very clear on the past on Donald Trump. Not a conservative.

But you'll notice he's being much smarter than I am. He's trying to make the point to the Trump supporters, "He has said these things. He's the one. We're not making the transition. Cruz is not the one making the transition. Trump is the one making these transitions, or so he says." I thought that was really telling and very powerful coming from Mark Levin.

MARK: -- right now is that the attack on Cruz, in many ways is an attack on us. That's the problem.

He's nasty, nasty, nasty, Donald says. Why? Because Mitch McConnell thinks he's nasty? Because Bob Dole thinks he's nasty? Because the dug-in, ruling elite Republicans think he's nasty? Now we're all supposed to genuflect and say, "Yeah, he's nasty. That's right. We don't like Cruz. He doesn't get along with anybody."

Ladies and gentlemen, you're attacking yourself. I don't care who you like, it doesn't even make any sense. So all of a sudden --

GLENN: Stop. Listen to that. This is what I've been trying to say, but not nearly as eloquent as Mark has: It doesn't make any sense. The guy we prayed for -- I truly believe that the guy we prayed for is Ted Cruz. When we all got together and said, "We need a strong constitutionalist. We need someone who is going to return us to our values, but actually understand them. We need a guy who is going to go in to Washington and actually do everything he told us he would and not sell his soul out to the devil. Just remember where he came from. Be the Mr. Smith Goes to Washington that is willing to die on his desk on the floor." He's here. And now we're being told he's too mean, he's too nasty, nobody likes him, he can't win, he can't win even in his own party. That's a sign of, he's on the right track. And for us to attack him now, as Mark said, is an attack on ourselves.

MARK: What we thought was courage, what we thought was Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, you and I are supposed to believe this guy is bought out by the banks, this guy is nasty, this guy doesn't get along with anybody, screw him. Is that what we're supposed to do? I'm all in favor --

GLENN: Stop. Stop. I want you to ask yourself this: Has Mark Levin finally been bought off? Has Mark Levin finally betrayed the republic? Is Mark Levin a traitor? Has Mark Levin given up his principles? Has George Will given up his principles? Is George Will not really a conservative? Has Michelle Malkin given up her principles? Has Michelle Malkin, is she just doing this for money or for fame?

You know, when you look at special guests, you have to ask yourself, does that special guest have the same principles that we all said we were going for five years ago? Small government. No dictatorship. An end to the -- the -- the nonstop executive order after executive order. The not destroying your enemies.

How many times did we say, "I'm willing to sit down with Barack Obama. He won't listen to us. He's not listening to us?" And instead, he uses the IRS to destroy us. When you have a special guest, you have to ask yourself, "Is that special guest consistent, or are they now standing with somebody who would just as quickly use the IRS for an enemies' list on the other side?"

Is there a reason -- can you tell me, what reason does Michelle Malkin, how is Michelle Malkin going to get rich by standing up and saying, "This isn't right?" How is Mark Levin coming out and saying, "This doesn't even make sense. You're betraying yourself. We are attacking ourselves," how is he going to get rich? How am I going to suddenly become famous or rich by saying these things? It doesn't make any sense.

It's -- it's -- you've taken emotional gasoline. He's allowed -- Donald Trump has taken emotional gasoline and thrown it on everybody. It's the same tactic that Saul Alinsky talks about and that Barack Obama uses. It's just -- it's time to step back and be cool and say, "All right. Wait a minute. What is consistent?"

Now, a lot of people will immediately go to, "I want to win. We've got to win." And I understand that. I'm the guy who told you 20 minutes ago, the country is over. It is over. Catastrophic collapse is coming, and you're going to have to rebuild from the ground up.

So I know that. But who do we -- who do we become when we cross that Rubicon?

Featured Image: Conservative radio host Mark Levin acknowledges the crowd after speaking at a 'Cut Spending Now' rally at the conservative Americans for Prosperity (AFP) 'Defending the American Dream Summit' in Washington on November 5, 2011. (Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/Getty Images)

Washington Post EXPOSED: How Watergate editors almost published a fake Pulitzer Prize-winning story

Episode 6 of Glenn’s new history podcast series The Beck Story releases this Saturday.

This latest installment explores the history of Left-wing bias in mainstream media. Like every episode of this series, episode 6 is jam-packed with historical detail, but you can’t squeeze in every story, so some inevitably get cut from the final version. Part of this episode involves the late Ben Bradlee, who was the legendary editor of the Washington Post. Bradlee is legendary mostly because of the Watergate investigation that was conducted on his watch by two young reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein. Bradlee, Woodward, and Bernstein became celebrities after the release of the book and movie based on their investigation called All the President’s Men.

But there is another true story about the Washington Post that you probably won’t see any time soon at a theater near you.

In 1980, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee wanted to expand the Post’s readership in the black community. The paper made an effort to hire more minority journalists, like Janet Cooke, a black female reporter from Ohio. Cooke was an aggressive reporter and a good writer. She was a fast-rising star on a staff already full of stars. The Post had a very competitive environment and Cooke desperately wanted to win a Pulitzer Prize.

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

When Cooke was asked to work on a story about the D.C. area’s growing heroin problem, she saw her chance to win that Pulitzer. As she interviewed people in black neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the heroin epidemic, she was appalled to learn that even some children were heroin addicts. When she learned about an eight-year-old heroin addict named Jimmy, she knew she had her hook. His heartbreaking story would surely be her ticket to a Pulitzer.

Cooke wrote her feature story, titling it, “Jimmy’s World.” It blew away her editors at the Post, including Bob Woodward, who by then was Assistant Managing Editor. “Jimmy’s World” would be a front-page story:

'Jimmy is 8 years old and a third-generation heroin addict,' Cooke’s story began, 'a precocious little boy with sandy hair, velvety brown eyes and needle marks freckling the baby-smooth skin of his thin brown arms. He nestles in a large, beige reclining chair in the living room of his comfortably furnished home in Southeast Washington. There is an almost cherubic expression on his small, round face as he talks about life – clothes, money, the Baltimore Orioles and heroin. He has been an addict since the age of 5.'

Readers were hooked. And outraged. The mayor’s office instructed the police to immediately search for Jimmy and get him medical treatment. But no one was able to locate Jimmy. Cooke wasn’t surprised. She told her editors at the Post that she had only been able to interview Jimmy and his mother by promising them anonymity. She also revealed that the mother’s boyfriend had threatened Cooke’s life if the police discovered Jimmy’s whereabouts.

A few months later, Cooke’s hard work paid off and her dream came true – her story was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Cooke had to submit some autobiographical information to the Prize committee, but there was a slight snag. The committee contacted the Post when they couldn’t verify that Cooke had graduated magna cum laude from Vassar College. Turns out she only attended Vassar her freshman year. She actually graduated from the University of Toledo with a B.A. degree, not with a master’s degree as she told the Pulitzer committee.

Cooke’s editors summoned her for an explanation. Unfortunately for Cooke and the Washington Post, her resume flubs were the least of her lies. After hours of grilling, Cooke finally confessed that “Jimmy’s World” was entirely made up. Jimmy did not exist.

The Pulitzer committee withdrew its prize and Cooke resigned in shame. The Washington Post, the paper that uncovered Watergate – the biggest political scandal in American history – failed to even vet Cooke’s resume. Then it published a front-page, Pulitzer Prize-winning feature story that was 100 percent made up.

Remarkably, neither Ben Bradlee nor Bob Woodward resigned over the incident. It was a different time, but also, the halo of All the President’s Men probably saved them.

Don’t miss the first five episodes of The Beck Story, which are available now. And look for Episode 6 this Saturday, wherever you get your podcasts.

UPDATED: 5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and one who hasn't)

Zach Gibson / Stringer, Brandon Bell / Staff | Getty Images

With Biden removed from the 2024 election and only a month to find a replacement before the DNC, Democrats continue to fall in line and back Vice President Kamala Harris to headline the party's ticket. Her proximity and familiarity with the Biden campaign along with an endorsement from Biden sets Harris up to step into Biden's shoes and preserve the momentum from his campaign.

Glenn doesn't think Kamala Harris is likely to survive as the assumed Democratic nominee, and once the DNC starts, anything could happen. Plenty of powerful and important Democrats have rallied around Harris over the last few days, but there have been some crucial exemptions. Here are five democrats that have thrown their name behind Harris, and two SHOCKING names that didn't...

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

High-ranking Senate Democrat Dick Durbin officially put in his support for Harris in a statement that came out the day after Biden stepped down: “I’m proud to endorse my former Senate colleague and good friend, Vice President Kamala Harris . . . our nation needs to continue moving forward with unity and not MAGA chaos. Vice President Harris was a critical partner in building the Biden record over the past four years . . . Count me in with Kamala Harris for President.”

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

The Monday after Biden stepped down from the presidential VP hopeful, Gretchen Whitmer released the following statement on X: “Today, I am fired up to endorse Kamala Harris for president of the United States [...] In Vice President Harris, Michigan voters have a presidential candidate they can count on to focus on lowering their costs, restoring their freedoms, bringing jobs and supply chains back home from overseas, and building an economy that works for working people.”

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Staff | Getty Images

Mere hours after Joe Biden made his announcement, AOC hopped on X and made the following post showing her support: "Kamala Harris will be the next President of the United States. I pledge my full support to ensure her victory in November. Now more than ever, it is crucial that our party and country swiftly unite to defeat Donald Trump and the threat to American democracy. Let’s get to work."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is arguably one of the most influential democrats, backed Harris's campaign with the following statement given the day after Biden's decision: “I have full confidence she will lead us to victory in November . . . My enthusiastic support for Kamala Harris for President is official, personal, and political.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

Drew Angerer / Stringer | Getty Images

Massasschesets Senator Elizabeth Warren was quick to endorse Kamala, releasing the following statement shortly after Harris placed her presidential bid: "I endorse Kamala Harris for President. She is a proven fighter who has been a national leader in safeguarding consumers and protecting access to abortion. As a former prosecutor, she can press a forceful case against allowing Donald Trump to regain the White House. We have many talented people in our party, but Vice President Harris is the person who was chosen by the voters to succeed Joe Biden if needed. She can unite our party, take on Donald Trump, and win in November."

UPDATED: Former President Barack Obama: ENDORSED

Spencer Platt / Staff | Getty Images

Former President Barack Obama wasted no time releasing the following statement which glaringly omits any support for Harris or any other candidate. Instead, he suggests someone will be chosen at the DNC in August: "We will be navigating uncharted waters in the days ahead. But I have extraordinary confidence that the leaders of our party will be able to create a process from which an outstanding nominee emerges. I believe that Joe Biden's vision of a generous, prosperous, and united America that provides opportunity for everyone will be on full display at the Democratic Convention in August. And I expect that every single one of us are prepared to carry that message of hope and progress forward into November and beyond."

UPDATED: On Friday, July 26th Barack and Michelle Obama officially threw their support behind Harris over a phone call with the current VP:

“We called to say, Michelle and I couldn’t be prouder to endorse you and do everything we can to get you through this election and into the Oval Office.”

The fact that it took nearly a week for the former president to endorse Kamala, along with his original statement, gives the endorsement a begrudging tone.

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

AP Photo/John Raoux

Prominent and wealthy Florida lawyer and democrat donor John Morgan was clearly very pessimistic about Kamala's odds aginst Trump when he gave the following statement: “You have to be enthusiastic or hoping for a political appointment to be asking friends for money. I am neither. It’s others turn now . . . The donors holding the 90 million can release those funds in the morning. It’s all yours. You can keep my million. And good luck . . . [Harris] would not be my first choice, but it’s a done deal.”

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday was targeted in an assassination attempt during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. It occurred just after 6:10 p.m. while Trump was delivering his speech.

Here are the details of the “official” story. The shooter was Thomas Matthew Crooks. He was 20 years old from Bethel Park, Pennsylvania. He used an AR-15 rifle and managed to reach the rooftop of a nearby building unnoticed. The Secret Service's counter-response team responded swiftly, according to "the facts," killing Crooks and preventing further harm.

Did it though? That’s what the official story says, so far, but calling this a mere lapse in security by Secret Service doesn't add up. There are some glaring questions that need to be answered.

If Trump had been killed on Saturday, we would be in a civil war today. We would have seen for the first time the president's brains splattered on live television, and because of the details of this, I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't have been viewed as JFK 2.0.

How does someone sneak a rifle onto the rally grounds? How does someone even know that that building is there? How is it that Thomas Matthew Crooks was acting so weird and pacing in front of the metal detectors, and no one seemed to notice? People tried to follow him, but, oops, he got away.

How could the kid possibly even think that the highest ground at the venue wouldn't be watched? If I were Crooks, my first guess would be, "That’s the one place I shouldn't crawl up to with a rifle because there's most definitely going to be Secret Service there." Why wasn't anyone there? Why wasn't anyone watching it? Nobody except the shooter decided that the highest ground with the best view of the rally would be the greatest vulnerability to Trump’s safety.

Moreover, a handy ladder just happened to be there. Are we supposed to believe that nobody in the Secret Service, none of the drones, none of the things we pay millions of dollars for caught him? How did he get a ladder there? If the ladder was there, was it always there? Why was the ladder there? Secret Service welds manhole covers closed when a president drives down a road. How was there a ladder sitting around, ready to climb up to the highest ground at the venue, and the Secret Service failed to take it away?

There is plenty of video of eyewitnesses yelling that there was a guy with a rifle climbing up on a ladder to the roof for at least 120 seconds before the first shot was fired. Why were the police looking for him while Secret Service wasn't? Why did the sniper have him in his sights for over a minute before he took a shot? Why did a cop climb up the ladder to look around? When Thomas Matthew Cooks pointed a gun at him, he then ducked and came down off the ladder. Did he call anyone to warn that this young man had a rifle within range of the president?

How is it the Secret Service has a female bodyguard who doesn't even reach Trump's nipples? How was she going to guard the president's body with hers? How is it another female Secret Service agent pulled her gun out a good four minutes too late, then looked around, apparently not knowing what to do? She then couldn't even get the pistol back into the holster because she's a Melissa McCarthy body double. I don't think it's a good idea to have Melissa McCarthy guarding the president.

Here’s the critical question now: Who trusts the FBI with the shooter’s computer? Will his hard drive get filed with the Nashville manifesto? How is it that the Secret Service almost didn't have snipers at all but decided to supply them only one day before the rally because all the local resources were going to be put on Jill Biden? I want Jill Biden safe, of course. I want Jill Biden to have what the first lady should have for security, but you can’t hire a few extra guys to make sure our candidates are safe?

How is it that we have a Secret Service director, Kimberly Cheatle, whose experience is literally guarding two liters of Squirt and spicy Doritos? Did you know that's her background? She's in charge of the United States Secret Service, and her last job was as the head of security for Pepsi.

This is a game, and that's what makes this sick. This is a joke. There are people in our country who thought it was OK to post themselves screaming about the shooter’s incompetence: “How do you miss that shot?” Do you realize how close we came to another JFK? If the president hadn't turned his head at the exact moment he did, it would have gone into the center of his head, and we would be a different country today.

Now, Joe Biden is also saying that we shouldn't make assumptions about the motive of the shooter. Well, I think we can assume one thing: He wanted to kill the Republican presidential candidate. Can we agree on that at least? Can we assume that much?

How can the media even think of blaming Trump for the rhetoric when the Democrats and the media constantly call him literally worse than Hitler who must be stopped at all costs?

These questions need to be answered if we want to know the truth behind what could have been one of the most consequential days in U.S. history. Yet, the FBI has its hands clasped on all the sources that could point to the truth. There must be an independent investigation to get to the bottom of these glaring “mistakes.”

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Chip Somodevilla / Staff, Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Image

It feels like all of the tension that has been building over the last four years has finally burst to the surface over the past month. Many predicted 2024 was going to be one of the most important and tumultuous elections in our lifetimes, but the last two weeks will go down in the history books. And it's not over yet.

The Democratic National Convention is in August, and while Kamala seems to be the likely candidate to replace Biden, anything could happen in Chicago. And if Biden is too old to campaign, isn't he too old to be president? Glenn doesn't think he'll make it as President through January, but who knows?

There is a lot of uncertainty that surrounds the current political landscape. Trump came out of the attempted assassination, and the RNC is looking stronger than ever, but who knows what tricks the Democrats have up their sleeves? Let us know your predictions in the poll below:

Glenn's Show Prep

Mark Levin Delivers Powerful Monologue on GOP Candidates, Where We Stand

Washington Post EXPOSED: How Watergate editors almost published a fake Pulitzer Prize-winning story

Readers were hooked. And outraged.

UPDATED: 5 Democrats who have endorsed Kamala (and one who hasn't)

Sen. Dick Durbin: ENDORSED

Michigan Gov. Whitmer: ENDORSED

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ENDORSED

Rep. Nancy Pelosi: ENDORSED

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: ENDORSED

UPDATED: Former President Barack Obama: ENDORSED

Prominent Democratic Donor John Morgan: DID NOT ENDORSE

How did Trump's would-be assassin get past Secret Service?

POLL: Do you think Trump is going to win the election?

Is Trump going to win the election?

Did the assassination attempt increase Trump's chances at winning in November?

Did Trump's pick of J.D. Vance help his odds?

Did the Trump-Biden debate in June help Trump's chances?

Did Biden's resignation from the election hand Trump a victory in November?

Do the Democrats have any chance of winning this election?