second annual christmas tree lighting live from fox square in new york city, thank you all for watching tonight dana and ben on this, we head to the week, i'll see you tomorrow night 7:00 p.m. eastern for the story, have a good night everybody. here is mark live in ♪ mark: hello america i'm mark within and this is "life, liberty and levin" and i'm glad you are with us. fraud in an election but what is fraud? is criminal fraud, civil fraud. what happens when a state abandons completely its constitution? the supreme court of that state conducts itself flawlessly? is that fraud? i want to talk to you about the battleground estate called the commonwealth of pennsylvania as one of the oldest legislators in

our country and one of the oldest constitutions in our country. we all know philadelphia is the birthplace of the country and that is where the declaration of independence was written and that is where the constitution was written. it's very, very important battleground states and the democrats wanted to make sure that in 2020 it came out for biden because in 2016 it came out for trump. what am i talking about? you hear this phrase is systemic fraud and there is no evidence of a systemic broad and you see reporters interviewing officials of various state government saying there is no fraud whatsoever. let me ask you a question. fourteen months ago in the state of pennsylvania if you had voted by mail in ballot it would have been discarded. if that mail in ballot have been counted that would have been fraught. fourteen ago in the state of pennsylvania if you sent in a ballot without a signature that ballot would be discarded.

if it was counted, that would be criminal fraud. fourteen months ago in the state of pennsylvania if you sent in a ballot with a signature that did not match the signature they had on file, that would be discarded. if it was counted, there would be for criminal fraud. fourteen months ago in the state of pennsylvania if you sent in a ballot beyond election day it would not be counted and if it was, that would be fraud. if you would send in a ballot without a postal stamp date on it, it would not be counted for it if it was, that would be fraud or if you sent and about where they cannot tell with the date was because there was a smudge on the ink, it would not be counted. if it was counted, that was fraud. all of those ballots today cou count. they were all counted in pennsylvania because of unconstitutional and illegal changes that were made by officials and made quote unquote, officially by individuals in pennsylvania.

none of this is discussed in a single newsroom in america on a single tv show, radio show or any other show. i want to slowly walk you through what took place in pennsylvania and this sort of thing has taken place, to some degree or another in numerous states. october 2019, 14 months ago the republican state legislator in pennsylvania passed an omnibus bill called acts 77. in acts 77 they included language they are changing election laws to allow universal mail and voting. the problem is pennsylvania, being an old state, having an old constitution, one of the original late state legislators did not allow that. there wasn't even early voting in pennsylvania. the only way he could have eight mail and vote was through the absentee ballots and you had to go through a process they are, multistep process in order to get an absentee ballot. you might say what about

covid-19? in october 2019 there was no covid-19, was there? there was no virus and this push for mail in voting has been going on with the democrats for at least a decade. one of the first places they imposed it was in california among other things and they have tried to do this in every state. the republican state legislator in pennsylvania buckled during they passed it, as i say, as part of this ominous bill and the democrat governor who that is a leftist signed it almost immediately. in fact, all the statewide offices in pennsylvania, u of left-wing democrats in those offices and republican legislator. okay, that's the mail in voting. what else happened? or what else happened was the governor did not think it went far enough so he goes to legislator and says you know, the signature requirements, we really shouldn't have that in the postmark requirements we really don't need that in these

other requirements that it has to be in by election day in order to be a few more days afterwards so we can count the ballots to legislator said no, no we will not do that. he said yes, you are. so he winds up going to the supreme court of pennsylvania and the supreme court of pennsylvania has seven justices. couple years ago they had an election for three justices and the republicans really weren't paying attention to it and the democrats were. they backed three hard-core leftists for the supreme court of pennsylvania, among other things. they were thinking and 2020. the labor unions poured in a fortune and the teacher unions poured in a fortune and the usual group supporting a fortune and they won all three seats. and now, the makeup of the pennsylvania supreme court, as they say the members are elected is a five-two democrats. the democrats when it comes to election law those by the stick much like the three democrats in

john roberts on the u.s. supreme court. so what did those democrats do? they said, you know what, we got a good idea. a few months before the election, they said yes, no signatures required and you don't need signature comparison and you don't need a postal date and if the postal date is smudged, you are to counted anyway. yes, even though election day ends on tuesday at 8:00 p.m. eastern time we will extended until 5:00 p.m. eastern time on friday. they had no legal or constitutional basis for doing any of that so they violated article two, section one, clause two of the united states constitution which leaves the power to the state legislator to make the election. now, let's circle back. stay with me here. the reason why reporters don't cover this is either they are left-wing or they are too stupid to follow this. the moment the state legislator in october 2019 passed the

change to its election laws to allow mail in voting as the base violated the state constitution of pennsylvania but why is that? under the constitution of pennsylvania if there was to be any election law changes you have to amend the constitution. did they amend the constitution? no. what is required to amend the constitution of pennsylvania? it's very complicated. there needs to be a majority vote of both houses of the state legislator, not once. but twice. then there needs to be a respite and then there needs to be ads in two papers in every county of pennsylvania, all 67 counties and then there needs to be a respite and then finally, the citizenry of pennsylvania gets to vote on whether or not they want the amendments. it has to be on the ballots. did that happen? no, it did not happen. the citizenry of pennsylvania and we talk about this disenfranchisement and they

weren't asked to vote on this change in their election laws for mail-in ballots, let alone these other changes with this supreme court state made but they were all really disenfranchised. so the state legislator in october 2019 acted unconstitutionally. the governor, by signing it, acted unconstitutionally. the state supreme court by changing even the unconstitutional law acted unconstitutionally plus violated that article two section of the constitution of pennsylvania. this matter has now been appealed to the united states supreme court. why? you have courageous individuals in pennsylvania, including congressman mike kelly, sean parnell who ran for the house in western pennsylvania and six other petitioners and they said wait one moment, this whole thing is a disaster. we will sue that this whole thing is unconstitutional so they sue and it goes to the commonwealth judge and she's an appellate judge and she's very

courageous and she rules yes, i will put in place a temporary injunction that pennsylvania governor secretary of state both democrats, stop certifying electors and we will have a hearing in my court on friday, two days later and i'm putting in a temporary injunction which means when she said because the petitioners are likely to succeed and win on the merits. while. the attorney general of pennsylvania who is also left-wing democrat who was also on the ballot at the time said no, no. we want to subvert the appellate courts and get around the appellate court just as we got round the constitution in the first place and go to our five friends on the supreme court and they will take up our case so rather than prepare for the hearing on friday the attorney general runs to the supreme court of pennsylvania and what does that court do? within 48 hours over the weekend

we can before this one they rule you know what, latches, you are here too late. we will throw your case out and we will throw it out with prejudice meaning you can't bring it up again and don't you dare knock on our door again. done. latches but what does laches mean? basically in plain english, you are too late. you had a time to come before became too late. why did you come after the election? you should've come before the election. the problem is the word is standing and in pennsylvania has a very strict standing requirements which is sometimes honored and sometimes not so if the congressman and the candidates had brought this case before the election what do you think the five democrats on that board would have said, mr. producer? you have no standing. you not been heard yet. there is not even been election. so in other words, you have no due process whatsoever when it comes to the state of

pennsylvania and the supreme court of pennsylvania so the appeal to the u.s. supreme court and you need what is called a federal question and there is not only a federal question here but a superduper federal question. if there ever was a federal question, why this whole matter? you're electing delegates and state senators and electing congressman and so forth and the electoral college is a federal creation and the entire electoral college process depends on the integrity of the states and so if you have a state that sends electors to the electoral college, that is the governor signs what is called a certificate of ascertainment and goes to the archivist of the united states and he collects the electoral college votes and sends it to the joint session of the new congress that meets on generate six by statute and they have all these electors and wait, there's pennsylvania. pennsylvania's electors are tainted because they are presented to the united states

congress which will then select the president and vice president of the united states after they counted them and they are presented to the united states congress but it could be argued they are illegitimate because the state legislator did not follow the states own constitution. you might say but under article to the state legislator can do whatever it wants paid no, it can't do whatever it wants food but at the state ledge later passed a law and said only democrat electors can ever go to the electoral college? that would be ridiculous. the framers and certainly the rat of fires in the state conventions assumed the states would follow their constitution. when you have learned every power that is not flawless power to do whatever you want. it is to do whatever is legal within the confines of the law and the state constitution. there is a huge federal question here. finally, some people are saying what you expect the united states supreme court to do? to rule these 2.6 million so

people who put in a male in ballots of their votes don't count. first of all, we are a nation of laws. what was fraud or team wants to go should not be legitimate today, especially when it states violates its own constitution and those public officials in pennsylvania violate their oath to that constitution. putting that aside, note that is not the job of united states supreme court. the job of the united states supreme court is to address the federal issue what the courts should do if mark were a justice, is the following: take the case up because there is clearly a federal issue and it will wind up in congress and it should rule that what the state of pennsylvania did violates the federal constitution on a number of grounds and is, in fact, unconstitutional but what is the remedy? the supreme court doesn't have to fashion a remedy. it can leave it to the political

bodies as article two leaves it to the state legislator or, in the end, to leave it to congress. congress needs to know that those elected that it received it received in violation of, not only the pennsylvania state constitution but that those electors are tainted under the federal constitution and because of what the state did under the state constitution. in criminal law we have the fruit of the poisonous tree and not making a direct parallel but every step that is taken past the initial step with the lobbying violated and criminal law, it doesn't matter, all the rest of it, even to the end is poisoned. that's the same thing here. it is really the same thing here. i ask you, when the department of justice says we see no evidence of systemic fraud, isn't that irrelevant? what we see here is a fraud perpetrated against of the people of pennsylvania and

against the american people and the electoral college process by politicians who violated the constitution repeatedly and who violated the rule of law by a rogue state supreme court and unless the u.s. supreme court, as it did in bush versus gore, exercise legitimately is power of judicial review we have a potential constitutional crisis in this matter. in one way or the other, congress will have to resolve it on january 6. the u.s. supreme court should not just sit there and take a pass when, in fact, this type of u.s. open court to intercede which is exactly what the petitioners are asking it to do. i we'll be rightit back. ♪ so try making it smaller, and you'll be surprised at how easily starting small can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette.

starting small can lead to something big. it's just a cold.

if you have high blood pressure, a cold is not just a cold. most cold medicines may raise blood pressure. choose coricidin hbp. the brand with a heart. for powerful cold relief without raising your blood pressure. the team's been working around the clock.wire, we've had to rethink our whole approach. we're going to give togetherness. logistically, it's been a nightmare. i'm not sure it's going to work. it'll work. i didn't know you were listening.

♪ mark: welcome back. our first guest wrote an incredibly powerful piece in the spectator called reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling to his name is patrick basham director of the democracy institute which is a wonderful group and a professional pollster and patrick, it's a pleasure to have you. i would like you to walk through these issues that you found to be deeply puzzling. go right ahead.

>> absolutely. i approached the article, none of us are objective but we all try to be and we hope we release independent-minded and so how would independent mind person assess the quote unquote outcome as the media has designated its of the 2020 presidential election and i looked at the aspects. first of all, i looked at the because i results and if you look at the results you see how donald trump improved his performance, national performance over 2016 by almost 20% no incumbent president has ever lost a reelection bid if he's increased his votes. obama went down by three and half million votes between 2 2042008 and 2012 but still want comfortably. if you look at those results you see donald trump did very well, even better than four years earlier with the white working class and held his own with women and suburban voters

against most of the polling expectations and did very well with catholics and improved his vote amongst jewish voters and the best minority performance for a public and since richard nixon in 1960. he did so well with african-americans and importantly with hispanics. i suggest this thought experiment. if you once took 100 well informed about the american political scene, 100 observers who were sequestered for the actual election night and since and you gave them the vote breakdown by demographic group and you saw where biden and trump did well or did poorly and laid out those numbers but you admitted the one fact or so i say the one assertion that biden who won the national popular vote and consequently in the prospective swing states would be the next president and gave them all the demographic data and all the exit poll data and asked them what you think won the election? my suggestion to your viewers is that 99, at least out of those

hundred independent well-informed observers, would say obviously trump. so we know from the vote itself although the alleged vote, alleged results that it is something very strange is happened because the numbers just don't add up. they don't measure up to our polling that was conducted right up to the election and the likes of richard barrows but the polls that were the most accurate by some distance and everything suddenly went very strange in the middle of the night. now that could happen but it's just very, very unusual. if this was an exceptional election that some people assert and that is why the numbers seem strange then you would expect it to be or have a uniformity to that exceptionalism so joe biden would have increased his support, not just ten key precincts in key cities, and keys between the states and nowhere else but would have had a uniform victory and he was the challenger and has apparently allegedly received more votes

than any candidate for president in american history and yet, he has done very, very poorly and most of the country except where it absolutely mattered. another way of looking at this is to look at what i call the non- pulling metrics and the things like party registration trends. how the candidates did in their respective presidential primaries and the number of individual donations and how much enthusiasm each candidate generated in the opinion of polls. there were a dozen or more of these metrics and these metrics have a 100% accuracy rate in terms of predicting the winner of the presidential election and some are more recently google searches and others like registration trends are far more history behind them. in 2016 they all indicated strongly that donald trump would win against most of the public

polling. that was again the case in 2020. if we are to accept that biden one against the trends of all these non- pulling metrics, not only means that one of these metrics was inaccurate this time for the first time ever but it means that each one of these metrics was wrong for the first time and at the same time as all of the others. it is not statistically impossible but it is statistically implausible. another way of looking at what happened is to look at how the vote was for the vote ballots were accumulated and how they were tabulated and counted on election night and obviously since then and in fact, in places like california they are still counting. what you see there is a ridiculous, bizarre number of anomalies and some of them are statistical and some are procedural. you have, for example, a historically low ballot rejection rate for absentee and mail-in ballots. rejection rates which, in the primaries, earlier this year, were well into the double

digits. which historically have often been very high. in these key swing estates or at least in the key swing counties, we are seen rejection rates of less than 1%, often close to zero. now, given the increase in absentee balloting and the lack of experience that most of the new voters and those doing the counting would have with those ballots it is implausible to put it politely that that figure would be as low as it was and, for example, if an estate one of these contested states like arizona or georgia, if the ballot rejection rate was only 2% say, rather than under one, donald trump would win comfortably. mark: when we come back there's a few other aspects we should look at that you looked at carefully and you are interested. i want to get to those as well. we'll be right back. ♪ ore and recover.

theraflu hot beats cold. >> tech: every customer has their own safelite story. this couple was on a camping trip... ...when their windshield got a chip. they drove to safelite for a same-day repair. and with their insurance, it was no cost to them. >> woman: really? >> tech: that's service you can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

here's another cleaning tip from mr. clean. cleaning tough bathroom and kitchen messes with sprays and wipes can be a struggle. there's an easier way.

try mr. clean magic eraser. just wet, squeeze and erase tough messes like bathtub soap scum... and caked-on grease from oven doors. now mr. clean magic eraser comes in disposable sheets. they're perfect for icky messes on stovetops... in microwaves... and all over the house. for an amazing clean, try mr. clean magic eraser, and mr. clean magic eraser sheets.

♪ you can count on me ♪ i'll be home for christmas ♪ if only in my dreams ♪ ♪ >> good evening and live from america's news headquarters i'm jackie in new york. all eyes on georgia tonight is the state center of the political world but the fate of the senate resting on the two runoff elections they are buried earlier today democratic candidate john ossoff debated an empty podium, the republican incumbent david per tube declined to make an appearance at the only scheduled debates between the two men. meanwhile, the second debate between democratic candidate raphael warnock and kelly

loeffler just wrapping up a few minutes ago but president rob announcing his personal attorney rudy giuliani has tested positive for covid-19. the former new york city mayor has a poorly been amended to georgetown university hospital to undergo treatment. i'm jackie and now back to "life, liberty and levin". for all your headlines log on to foxnews .com and watch the most powerful name in a news. fox news channel. ♪ mark: welcome back. patrick basham, patrick, a couple of things i want to follow-up with you quickly. number one, the minority vote. how did biden do nationwide on the minority vote? as opposed to these few counties, did he do better or worse? compared to say obama or clinton. >> biden did much worse than obama and even did worse than hillary clinton. he received less than 90% of the

african american vote, well under. it's impossible for a democratic presidential candidate to win an election with less than 90% of the african-american vote, especially with the proportionately lower turnout than normal. mark: i remember people saying if the president of the united states can pick up two or 3% more of the afghan american vote he's got this in the back to georgia member people saying that? >> i do and donald trump almost doubled the african-american vote which made it extremely impressive for him and that much harder for joe biden to be competitive in the election. mark: donald trump while he has said to have lost and that's why these challenges are going on and questions are being raised by me and people like you, legitimate questions, there hopkins had a hell of an election day and they slipped a couple of statehouses and they did not lose a single one and they did not lose a single republican incumbent and they've taken viscount today about 12 seats back in the house of representatives and they held onto the senate so far and there are two seats up we know in georgia that are crucial but 23

out of 33 senate seats up for republicans and they held onto those. the vast majority and even though they were predicted to lose so you have this massive swell of republican support at the state level and at the house level and they hold onto the senate for now and the president of the united states loses in a big electoral college defeat? does that make sense to anybody? >> it should not make sense because it simply doesn't make sense paired the media polls that biden would win in a landslide in the popular vote in the electoral college on beasley and there would be a blue wave that would increase nancy pelosi's majority in the house and give the democrats of the senates. as you say, none of that, none of that happens. none of that happened but strangely biden as the successor apparently allegedly successful challenger sweeps into the white house with absolutely no coattails and his party does worse with him as the victorious presidential candidate and then

one could have imagined. it is absolutely mind-boggling. this just doesn't happen this way. it is further testament to the fact that biden only did well in the precise areas of the country that he needed to do well to squeak by in certain key states. mark: people are literally trying to figure out what is taking place. you have civil suits by the campaign and civil suits by others who are not in the campaign and you have hearings taking place in the states, whether michigan or pennsylvania and other states trying to figure out what took place. the criminal bars are very high bar and they can quote systemic broad and i just explained what happened in pennsylvania and systemic fraud or no systematic fraud they cheated or they fixed the system and i don't mean reformed but fix the system to help joe biden and the democrats otherwise they would not have made these changes so my question to you is this, why did the democrats want to take the security and safety measures

out, signatures, postal dates, witnesses, observers, is it because they believe in good government or because they feel that they will win if they can institutionalize broad? >> it appears that the way in which an election is run in this country is the only aspect of public life and public policy where the democrats favor looser regulations rather than really strong tight regulatory state route for some reason philosophically and ideologically they flipped and they are schizophrenic on this. they think the looser the rules or maybe no rules at all is better and for some reason that is in an franchising element, tooled they believe, that, as you have said, and many others have said it disenfranchises arguably most people in the country. the democrats are in a strange position of advocating for a very light touch by government

in an area which seems quite clearly to benefit them but are very blunt crew to touch elsewhere. mark: they use california as a petri dish and they want to take all the worst practices of voting in california and apply them to all the states in california is now a one-party state, the republic and have no hope of taking back the state legislator where they have super majorities or the governorships or statewide offices and they have changed the rules they are and made it impossible and the democrats have talked about that to eliminating the electoral college and this is just more of the same. there is a war against the franchise in the war against the electorate and this is why you can't just roll over and say all right, we'll fight the next time grade there is no next time. this is the time and patrick basham, thank you for your peter chisholm and your outstanding organization to democracy institute and i wish you well, sir. >> thank you, mark. we appreciate it very much. mark: s we'll be right back. ♪ quitting feels so big.

so try making it smaller, and you'll be surprised at how easily starting small can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette. in connemara. right! connemara it is! there's one gift the whole family can share this holiday season, their story. give the gift of discovery, with an ancestrydna kit.

♪ mark: welcome back america. i have on the program now a very, very sharp young man, he's been on the program before, daniel horowitz with the blazing conservative review and he took a very laser look at the numbers in the battleground of the battleground states, commonwealth of pennsylvania and daniel horowitz, welcome. what did you find in the commonwealth of pennsylvania when you looked? >> mark, great to be back with you and look, what we found was magic. returns and political scientific data that we have not seen before. when it comes to mail-in ballots of which there were many, 2.6 million, it turns out that the always seemed to skew against trump even relative to other republicans and they always seem to favor biden even relative to other democrat candidates so comparing apples to apples. when you take a look at

republicans who won their races for state auditor or state treasurer it turns out that those republicans did better than trump on male ends but not on election day. on election day they had fewer votes than trump. when you go to the democrats victors such as dan shapiro, the notorious attorney general, he seemed to do better than biden on election day ballots but worse and this is on the secretary of states website, worse than biden on male ends. in other words, biden always one out on male ends and trump always got fewer votes. mark: what you are saying is, biden outperformed everyone, including fellow democrats on the male ends in a significant way and president trump underperformed statewide republicans on the mail-in ballots in a significant way so the gap between biden and trump was huge in mail-in ballots and yet, when it comes to

republicans versus democrats in these mail-in ballots the gaps were closer than biden was skyhigh and trump was ground l low. >> exactly. when you look at other states we are finding a similar pattern of a bunch of ballots that only had biden. at first they are always mail-in witches wrought with fraud and potential fraud but a lot of the naysayers will tell you look, a lot of people are only interested in the presidential debate and they just filled out and may be more democrats low information voters so they will only care about the presidential election but the problem with that is, why would you see this signature he and pennsylvania were even with in republican voters it seems that more of them filled out ballots for male inns down ballot which make sense of the comfort of your home and have more time and not rush online for an hour but then when you go to the democrats it seems like more democrats filled

out down ballots election day but not on the mail ins. couple that with the lower rejection rate and the fact that biden would have had to have won 80% of independent voters who were male in and 21% of republican mail-in voters, that cap is something we had never seen before. where there is smoke, there is fire. mark: you say when we know the president one 95% of the republican vote nationwide. he won the overwhelming majority of the republican vote in the in person voting. then when it comes to mail-in voting 21% or one fifth of the republicans voted for biden? 80% of the independent voters when the prior exit polls, as you write, showed that 52% supported biden. 80% of the independent voters went for biden? as you also point out in your

piece, let's assume every vote is illegal and there's not a single fraudulent vote among them that these numbers hold up. biden still should not have one, correct? >> exactly braid that was before the break even pointed where he had a couple points better than that and i tested that out for the break even at points and here is the thing, when you look at ohio, iowa and florida, which are all republik in states where they didn't have these mail-in shenanigans, ohio went through years of litigation to clean up their voter rolls and trump performed better than he did last time. it defies logic that he would recede in the rust belt and other states of matter when in ohio it is not like he wanted by two or three but eight points and it really does not make any sense. you could say that mail-in ballots skewed more left but there is no evidence anywhere in the country where there was this mass exodus of registered rural begins, if anything, you want of doing better slight leading and

independence but not republicans. mark: i want to pursue this because it's important. he is a blowout in ohio and wins big in ohio and wins big in florida and it's a blowout in florida almost half a million votes and they have mail-in voting systems there but they have safeguards that are now building mail-in voting systems there where as in pennsylvania they lifted all the safeguards and i want to talk about that when we return. we'll be right back. looks like a great day for achy, burning eyes over-the-counter eye drops typically work by lubricating your eyes and may provide temporary relief. ha! these drops probably won't touch me. xiidra works differently, targeting inflammation that can cause dry eye disease. what is that? xiidra, noooo! it can provide lasting relief. xiidra is the only fda approved treatment specifically for the signs and symptoms of dry eye disease. one drop in each eye, twice a day. don't use if you're allergic to xiidra.

common side effects include eyirrieye irritation, discomfort or blurred vision when applied to the eye, and unusual taste sensation. don't touch container tip to your eye or any surface. after using xiidra, wait 15 minutes before reinserting contacts. got any room in your eye? talk to an eye doctor about twice-daily xiidra. i prefer you didn't! xiidra. not today, dry eye. to syour body needs routine. system, centrum helps your immune defenses every day, with vitamin c, d and zinc. season, after season. ace your immune support, with centrum.

♪ mark: welcome back, daniel horowitz in the blazing conservative review. he looked at these numbers in pennsylvania then you look at ohio and you look at florida and they have big mail-in votes taken place and the safeguards in place and they are experienced with it and then you look at pennsylvania which mail-in voting comes in 14 months ago and they really no experience with it and the supreme court of the state takes off almost all the safeguards and you analyze the numbers there and you look at it from an analytical point of view and say that does not make sense but go ahead and further elaborate. >> sure, obviously in pennsylvania last time there were only 250,000 mail-in and now suddenly there's 2.6 million. you are talking about 12 times

as many studies have shown that those that don't have experience filling them out the first-timers and they tend to make more mistakes and the air rate is three times as great. yet when we look at the data on rejection rate symptoms of mania the rejection rate was 120 seventh of what it was for years ago and that really lends credence to this allegation of eight irregularities and funds of a nap versus ohio because when you look at ohio where we know we did not have these problems at the safeguard on male ends trump did better than he did and blew out eastern ohio and one the holding company, this is youngstown, this was the base of the fdr coalition republican have not been able to crack it but trump did well last time but lost it by about five points and he flipped it but then a little bit over the borderline now he lost erie county one last time he wanted? they only consider themselves the state of ohio in the same of college football. that does not make sense but

cleveland versus philly, cleveland the black turnout was down this election relative to hillary and we know generally speaking from the exit polling trump has done much better than he did even last time and certainly relative to republicans against obama but somehow, just in those states, just in those areas, just at those times of night of course, after that stoppage of counting that is when everything decided the political science of this election. mark: look at florida. look at the hispanic vote in florida. it's not just the just the cuban vote but across the board and the hispanic vote in florida and the minority vote in florida and the jewish vote in florida and the huge turnout in florida and again, this is a state that has experience with mail in voting and yet they have a governor and a legislator and a system that tamped down the potential for fraud. in other words, they weren't putting in place rules that would make it harder and harder

to determine what is taking place but they put in place rules that would make it easier and easier and easier to make sure that person voting is the person who says they are voting. >> one of the first things governor desantis did was to clean out that cesspool in broward county and their election board and actually played the off-season game the republicans never want to play to fight this when it is not during an election so we don't have a problem there after and it is funny when you look at the data and florida a lot of people think that was an anomaly but trump did very well because of the flip of the cuban community in miami-dade but if you do an analysis of that even if you give biden hillary's margin in miami-dade trump still perform slightly better than he did in 2016 when he won nationwide and one pencil mania, michigan and wisconsin so again you can't talk is up to that's just the cuban but in terms of the white suburban vote trump got crushed and that is what hurt him in

other states. there is a baseline of that but not more than what took place in florida when he was still able to make up the margins and all the areas he did better even with the slight bleeding and some of the suburbs. mark: quick question, if the republicans like some of the raw plug-ins if they say let's fight next time and let's fight next time and give it up and hear this at national review and you can't win these but let's just forget it, will fight next time but in 30 seconds or so what happens if they just give up and fight next line? >> this is what we believe the last ten years. there's a funny dichotomy that there has never been a bad sipping court ruling on election law in many years but all of this is coming from state courts and lower courts and the reason why we never get our day before the sabine court and were ruled by these bad lower court opinions is because they never follow through at election day and in the months thereafter when the case is ripe. if you give it up we will start

the cycle all over again and lose the next election as well. mark: and the baseline will be what happened now and the democrats will build on this baseline until they control the whole enchilada. i want to thank you, daniel horowitz, for your excellent work. take care and god bless. >> thank you. mark: we'll be right back. ♪ still warm. ♪ thanks, maggie. oh, alice says hi. for some of us, our daily journey is a short one. save 50% when you pay per mile with allstate. pay less when you drive less. you've never been in better hands. allstate. click or call for a quote today.

with acetaminophenction you've never been in better hands. fights pain in two ways. advil targets pain at the source... ...while acetaminophen blocks pain signals. the future of pain relief is here. new advil dual action.

♪ mark: welcome back. america, the reason why you have all this litigation in these hearings and questions taking place isn't because of donald trump, isn't because the president is a poor loser but because the democrats have destroyed our electoral system. they went through state by state by state to do it. they practiced in california and they practiced in other states and they have fine-tuned the system of undermining your vote and your franchise and they have destroyed the integrity of the process and in case they lost despite all these efforts, they

were going to blame, before the russians the postal service in their paramilitary wing was all prepared to riot in the streets and so forth and so on. now we are told to move along, move along. the democrat party is not the democrat party of 30, 40 years ago but a very radical anti- constitution, anti-american party in many respects. i'm talking about the leadership and those who serve mostly in congress. why do i tell you this? they have no respect for the constitution and they tell you it was just written by a bunch of slaveholders and they have no intention of operating within the four corners of the law, the state constitution, the federal constitutions and they want to operate outside the process in order to destroy the process. they are about power. power. in order to gain power and keep power and exercise power and impose their power on us they must destroyed the firewalls

that are in place, like in pennsylvania, like in these other states. that is exactly what this fight is about and that is exactly why the presidents fighting it and that's exactly why i support him and you should too. see you next time on "life, liberty and levin". ♪ steve: a huge weekend in georgia on the presidents rally last night in the debate tonight and in the moment my message to mitch mcconnell on the senate races and election fraud, huge weekend for the lockdown backlash as a los angeles restaurant owner powerfully exposes the cruelty and stupidity of democrat lockdown leaders. she joins us exclusively live tonight. good evening and welcome to the next revolution i'm steve hilton and this is the home of the resistance, pro- worker, profamily, pro- community and pro- america, positive populism and antiestablishment. tonight we take on the astonishment over the election cover up