that's how fox reports on this saturday february 6th of 2021 -- i'm jon scott thanks for watching we'll see you again tomorrow. >> hello america i'm mark levenn this is "life, liberty & levin" two great guests tonight. former federal judge appellate judge ken starr and senator josh hawley but first toipght talk to ken starr he's vast amount of constitutional knowledge and experience in the multiple administrations really. judge starr, toipght ask you couple of questions. let's start with impeachment. can you try a private citizen

been a civil officer of the united states and ever tried a president of the united states after he's left officer? >> no. and no. [laughter] the answer is emphatically not. the text of the constitution to me is absolutely clear that judgment and cases of impeachment runs to what removal and possible disqualification. and so a former officer by definition can't be remostmoved that's the text. the text is supported by our constitutional history. the only president in history to have resigned is richard nixon and i think is all your viewers know either from history or living through it that president nixon upon resignation flew to san clemente california and that was it. the house of representatives

which was considering articles of impeachment then stop the proceeding. the third if i may just say a wording the fact that the impeachment of trump now the second time, occurred when he was the president of the united states. one week before he didn't resign. before his term came to an end and accordance with the constitution and laws of the united states. but the article of impeachment had not been delivered over to the united states senate. now, when the president of the united states is the subject of impeachment, according to the constitution, the chief justice shall reside not he should be invited to preside. shall preside. we now know that chief justice roberts at least from reports is not going to be presiding over

the trial of now a private citizen. so everything other than one case maybe we can talk about of secretary of war in 1876 as if that's comparable to the president of the united states it is not. but let's just speak to that. that secretary of war example which is the best example that the proponents of eternal impeachment have was essentially an effort by the secretary of war who was corrupt to essentially skirt the constitutional powers of the house and the senate. it was on the verge of being impeached and likely to be convicted because he was corrupt. and there was powerful easted evidence of his corruption, and so he steps down literally at the 11th hour. an argument can be made that he was seeking to avoid the constitutional powers that the

house and the senate enjoy. but even there, even though he was impeached and then there was a trial, there was a huge battle in the senate over whether the senate has jurisdiction. here is my key point, the senate is utterly without jurisdiction to try donald trump and if they proceed to do so, they will, i believe, be running a foul at least potentially of the constitution's specific express prohibition against a bill of a simply put a bill is the legislative branch imposing a punishment on a prior citizen that's what disqualification would be all about. >> any bill of that is unconstitutional. article one section nine one of the two big no no's, congress shall not in the same sentence a

bill and pass ex post facto law something law and congress now make what is i just did today criminal that's expose factor you can't do that like the declaration of independence it was mindful of the history of abuses of the crowd but also of parliament. and the proponents of the eternal impeachment process which i've seen someone say well let's now have an impeachment of secretary of state, hillary clinton. excuse me. [laughter] she's no longer the secretary of state. i've seen it suggested that we now have a trial of president obama excuse me he's not the president of the united states. ditto for donald trump. and when people proponents of eternal impeachment stand up and say well look at parliamentary history. my response to that is,

parliamentary history is interesting. but it's not dispositive what is text and more over we have to remember mark as you well know parliament engage in numerous abuses including the impeachment power and text so clear that impeachment and judgment impeach the runs only to removal comma, and then potential disqualification. this has gone off the rails of our constitution. and frankly, ting should be stopped. my own view is i'm not the president's lawyer i have honor of doing legal service in the first round of impeachment is that, the whole thing should be stopped by the judiciary will they who knows but they should because it's a totally in my view one person's view, anti-constitutional effort the senate has no jurisdiction, and mark, the house allowed that,

right? as i said before, the house returned and voted on the article of impeachment one week before the president left office. so when you read the article of impeachment, right it says, donald trump president of the united states. they let the time run out. you don't continue when the time has expired, they should have marched article of impeachment over and started the trial immediately but they didn't and the senate should have started the trial. mark: you know judge starr maybe it is hard for people to understand certainly members of congress sometimes congress doesn't have power. sometimes senate doesn't have power. what the house of representatives did was a rush job on impeachment try toy to catch the president before he left office. it was a phony impeachment there were no hearings, no investigations, no witnesses, no due process, nothing.

we don't do that in our country. even when it comes to the impeachment clause, we don't treat individuals whether they're president or they're private citizens, the way they do in communist china, the way they do in iran, the way they do in korea. and other communist regimes. and yet in my view that's exactly what took place in the house of representatives they gave one hour debate on each side, i have in front of me the document that supposedly supported what they were doing it is 76 pages long. 26 pages of which were appendix. 50 pages of which are basically only eds about why they think the president insited insurrection. i've made the point judge starr, the president thed to insight insurrection i don't think he would send red tag guys running into capitol building taking over chairs doing that. if he wanted to do that sending in united states marine or something like that when you

read the president's speech, there was no incitement language there people may not like what he had to say and people may not like the fact that he objected to the election. but you need a hell of a lot more to incite an insurrection and that speech he gave and people look at the "new york times" found to a document so forth there was a lot of preparation before january 6th by these groups that wanted to storm the capitol building. and the timeline showed that 20 minutes before the president finished his speech these thugs attacked capitol building and so -- we hear members of congress use all kinds of language we hear members of the media constantly bringing up third right and using all kinds of language, of course, never incite violence of any kind and i'm watching this and i'm saying -- with the framers of the constitution really empower the senate chase down private citizens and if they did, why didn't they say so? they were smart people.

and if they did, why is this the first time in american history let's talk president. the first time in american history that it would ever be done? and i'm very concerned about this. because when we come back in our next segment judge starr, i see this kind of retribution that's being taking place where in thes think they can prevent an individual from running for president again by twisting the constitution. they don't get to do that. i see a violations of separation of powers taking place with joe biden signing executive orders like he's like he's the king today i'm doing this. today i'm doing that and not taking any questions by the way. i see the democrats in the senate using reconciliation on the budget process which was intended to be the final stage of a deliberate of process to try to get around the republicans because they only have a 50/50 senate there.

i see them talking about packing the supreme court breaking the constitution on the district of columbia by making it a state. you have to amend the constitution to make the district of columbia a state. i want to try to address all of these finishes with you. in the next couple of segments that we have, we'll be right back. this rain is bananas. lease the 2021 es 250 all-wheel drive for $349 a month for thirty six months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. at philadelphia, we know what makes for $349 a month fthe perfect schmears. of cream cheese. the recipe we invented over 145 years ago and me...the world's best, and possibly only, schmelier. philadelphia. schmear perfection.

history is a guide, and that was in the presidency of andrew jackson he was censerred he promptly wrote an impressive letter to the effect that you do not have back to the congress you don't have the authority to censure me at a trial in the senate or not you don't have this authority and eventually,

the resolution of censure was repealed. mark: but that's like passing resolution calling president a come -- they've already left. what's troubling to me here is -- the lack of respect for the constitution. and they're so busy trying to chase down donald trump at mar-a-lago this is precisely what framers are against you have a new regime that's in the government now the other one has left. go ahead and govern and do what you're supposed to do that's what i want to talk about now where there's not been a focus. i mention this on radio other day i said where the hell serve and now people are starting to pick up on it. as of the time i'm speaking to you now, joe biden has signed over 25 executive orders and over 40 executive actions. he sits there, he reads off a note card he signs it. okay we're going destroy women's sports next okay.

great, we're shutting down all oil drilling and production on federal, next i'm shutting down keystone xl pipeline okay next racial equity not equality this is monarchy i understand executive orders you understand executive orders we worked for presidents before. no president in american history has issued this many substantive legislative type executive orders certainly not in their first ten to 12 days in office. they're being comparisons done obama had leak five. trump had like 4, and then he's called on it other day and says i'm just reversing what trump is doing. he's not just reversing what trump is doing judge starr, i have 150 page document they put out that i call the biden/sanders manifesto he's going down that radical document one issue after another and imposing one man's rule nothing is submitted to congress. we elect members of congress too

there's supposed to be a deliberative process there's no deliberative process whatsoever. i would like your input on this. >> absolutely. we have a system of separated powers of checks and balances, and the idea that the founders lifted up was balanced government. and if a president is to exercise unilateral power he better be careful because the president may be exceeding his lawful powers under the constitution. and that's what the courts are there for. so let's stay tuned because we already know that a united states district judge has not joined deportation suspension order as utterly in violation of a specific law that congress passed here absolutely you're correct in saying it is not his prerogative the president's prerogative any president's prerogative to ignore the law. his job is to execute the law into the constitution. and if he goes beyond that i think he'll be held to account in courts of law across the united states.

mark: but this goes to the core of our system a upon the to the framers did, back in the 1500s famous writings jon locke talked about it and mention from federal papers several times that this was the key to get ratification of the constitution. they didn't want a parliament they didn't want a monarchy yet i feel we're getting both a parliament and monarchy in other words whatever biden doesn't get done by executive order, his democrats in the house with the slimmest of majority are promising to get done by roller coasting over the barriers that are in place even for congress. so we'll use the reconciliation act to pass whatever we want to which wasn't intended for that or pass a stot statute and change the supreme court and all kinds of activity outside of the boundaries of the constitution. are you concerned that in one respect we see centralization of

power and decision making and the first few weeks of the biden administration then on the other hand we see a movement towards more of the mob but certainly parliamentary system away from our republicans. >> yes. i don't like the signs of this -- of this first week plus have been very troubling for those who believe in the constitutional order to begin with and second what the constitution had in mind which is limited government. the assertion of extraordinary powers over the economy. when we look back to history, we see fda didn't just issue a bunch of executive orders, he went to congress and he want a congress that was willing to go along with the country was in very dire straights at the time of the depression. so energy in the executive is the federalist papers put it. we want an energetic executive but lord write that power can be

abused absolute power can be abused and absolute sense and your point is -- mark: you cannot attack control of the internet industry in this country simply by issuing executive fiats and declarations by saying you can drill you won't drill we're shutting this business down. i often think what in the world would the framers think of a president shutting down industries? of a president conducting himself this way? and there's no damn way in hell that the radification conventions in the states could ratified a constitution that authorized joe biden to do a joe biden is doing today. you disagree with that? >> i don't disagree request that because once again balanced government, of course, the framers concern was congress exceeding its powers. but there have been times including, during president truman's administration famously, that he went too far, and so too it is i think -- what's going to be frustrating

to wait to see what happens in the court. but the courts are going when i say the court, floral the courts of the united states but i think we should be encouraged that have promptly a federal district judge here might state of texas said mr. president you've gone too far with respect with the deportation suspension and law is clear so judges are doing what judges are supposed to do. the great chief justice john marshall said and versus medicine providence of the judicial department to say what the law is. not the president. mark: all right we'll be right back.

i'm erin. -and i'm margo. we've always done things our own way. charted our own paths. i wasn't going to just back down from moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis. psoriatic arthritis wasn't going to change who i am. when i learned that my joint pain could mean permanent joint damage, i asked about enbrel. enbrel helps relieve joint pain, and helps stop permanent joint damage. plus enbrel helps skin get clearer in psoriatic arthritis. ask your doctor about enbrel, so you can get back to your true self. -play ball! enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been someplace where fungal infections are common. or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have had hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure, or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding or paleness. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. visit enbrel.com to see how your joint damage could progress.

enbrel. eligible patients may pay as little as $5 per month. ♪upbeat music♪ transitions™ light under control. ♪upbeat music♪ transitions™ signature gen 8™ available now, in 4 vibrant style colors. transitions™ (soft music) (announcer)ow, in 4 vthis is chet.colors. he loves monday through friday but lives for the weekend. ♪ he's put some miles on his truck and now, it's time for something new. so he came to truecar and saw what other people paid for the same truck he wants. ♪ now, he can recognize a great price. truecar was so easy, chet was in and out and got right on back to the life he loves.

before you buy a car or truck, see what others paid for it with truecar. >> live from america news headquarters i'm jon scott, a migrant crisis is testing the new administration. thousands of families have surged for the southern border in recent days hoping to gain into the yietle under joe biden friendly immigration stance. hundreds of migrants who were detained at border have been released into the country. former president trump criticized such a practice calling it catch and release. more than 100 inmates took over a section of a st. louis jail today in a terrifying riot that left one corrections officer injured. the mayhem began around 2:30 in the morning when detainees started smashing window and throwing debris flooding self flood. law enforcement officers were forced to use tear gas to regain control. thankfully the injured officers sustained only minor injuries.

i'm jon scott catch me tomorrow at p.m. eastern for the "fox report" now back to "life, liberty & levin." ♪ ♪ mark: welcome back judge starr, i guess you're always a judge whefn you're retired as a judge. i think that's a pretty good title. [laughter] there's these constant efforts to skirt the constitution, you know, progressivism and constitutionalism don't get along very well like oil and water. and progressivism really is an ideology that seeks to find ways to get around the constitution and we constitutionalityist trying to uphold constitution one of the most they thinks that was discussed at the constitutional convention and critical for ratification of the constitution is who is in charge of the voting systems? and the states insisted we're in charge of how people vote.

within very general parameter. i mean, they were creating this federal government. so they have been in charge of everything before then. and we have article 2, section 1 clause 2 state legislatures decide how elections are to be held and how electors are chosen. nancy pelosi announced again a few weeks ago that one of her top priorities is geng to be hr1. house resolution 1, which is this massive federal government takeover of the state voting systems we're not talking about civil rights and that sort of thing we're talking about -- what time people show up, how they vote. where they vote, whether they can do mail-in voting, signatures and so forth what she's basic will done is taken all of the worst ideas out of california, from san francisco afterall. poured them into this piece of legislation and says in beginning of this, this bill -- the federal government is always had a supervisory role when it

comes to elections. now -- federal government doesn't have a supervisory role which it comes to elections it has its job and states have their job under the constitution. so again, this is another area that is under attack what do you make of this? >> it is very easy for congress to go too far and the exercise of its powers. it does have power to provide regulations. but you're so right that elections are entrusted under constitution to the states that's our federal system and our architecture just as we were talking about separation of powers and the prior segment now we're talking about federalism and division of power between washington, d.c. and the several states. and so congress can go too far. it is gone too far in a variety of times over our history intruding into authority of the states. and that we're not simply talking about a federal structure embodied in the constitution in the language. we're also talking about a specific part of our bill of

rights 10th amendment that reserves pours to the states. so if i would just suggest that the lawyers to speaker pelosi say let's attack close look at this because if we include such thing as you don't have to have a drivers license, that's just preposterous on its face or some sort of identification you have to do that to go almost anywhere these days to cash a check on get on an airplane so you can go too far and united states supreme court has been willing to state congress and say you've got even if it is signed into law by the president you can go too far you've intruded into the province of the states. mark: you make a great point jefferson and others when they wrote and talked about tyranny they talked about tyranny of the legislature. so tyranny comes in many forms i talked about this last week on this program you can have people or militants who do very, very violent things. like attacking the capitol building that's tyranny. you can p people dressed up in suits and have very nice dresses

inside the capitol building that are voting on all kind of things that you serve our constitutional order. that's tyranny too. and i'm just concerned when you look at what's taking place now, the war against the independence of the supreme court and the judiciary, the legislative process which is intended to really have absolute control by one party and limiting a deliberative process when you look at the executive branch signing executive orders, and then handing them out like lollipops without any involvement of any other branch of the government. it's fine if the courts come in iter la and try to sort these things out but it is miengsdset mentality that concerns me that people are not willing to play the game within the rules of the game and that is very troubling. >> what we're seeing is spirit of 1789 but not the constitutional convention and the ratification that '8 9 we're seeing signs of french

revolution of 1789 let's throw away the established order. let's simply do what we think is right to create a let's call it a new world order here in the united states. but happily our constitutional structure is sound it is erect and hopefully that the people of the united states will be rising up not in insurrection but in righteous and make their voices heard including very importantly to the individual member of the house of representatives as well as to the senate. >> starr always a pleasure god bless you my friend. >> thank you god bless you mark. >> we'll be right back. se thing s that i found through ancestry. i discovered my great aunt ruth signed up as a nursing cadet for world war ii. you see this scanned-in, handwritten document. the most striking detail is her age. she was only 17. knowing that she saw this thing happening and was brave enough to get involved and do something— that was eye opening.

bring your family history to life like never before. get started for free at ancestry.com

mark: welcome back. it's a pleasure to have senator josh hawley never met senator josh hawley but i'm a big fan the senator because people who attack him tend to attack me too. so it is good to know who they are. now senator first of all give

the american people a little bit of your background. >> thanks for having me i grew up in rural missouri. small town, and i mean small market about 4800 people. where i grew up, and then i went to catholic high school, and then on to college and law school i'm a lawyer don't hold that against me met my wife, in law school we work together actually at the united states supreme court. and got married an my background is in constitutional law, i was a constitutional lit gator with a particular focus on religious liberty and first amendment. then i was attorney general of the state of missouri. and i got elected to the u.s. senate just two short years ago. so it's -- it's been a fast ride i'll tell you to me the most important thing in my life of the to my wife erin married now for ten and a half years we have three little kids at home two boys, and just a couple of months ago we welcomed our first daughter. so our household is pretty busy

place. mark: that's wonderful. now senator, aoc and presley and others on democrat side in the house, it appears they can say just about anything they want to say to about anybody. they can make these outrage ois allegations about this country and outrageous allegations about their colleagues honestly they can make outrageous allegations about state of israel to which there's no pushback to which their colleagues don't seek any kind of recrimination what sort. you sir have taken on a lot of powerful interest in washington, d.c. you are what i would call a populous conservative. you saw the election results. you saw what was happening in the election and i don't to spend a ton of time on this. but among other thing use bring up pennsylvania. now, pennsylvania you had a

rogue state supreme court and a governor a secretary of my state i'm well familiar with this who changed election law in violation of article 2 section one clause 2 of the united states constitution. that matter was taken to the u.s. supreme court, was taken up twice by associate justice a.m. leto who organized to segregate ballot that case still in the supreme court one of the issues you wanted to raise on january 6th. it is a legitimate issue unlike russia collusion and so forth. and for this and for some other issues you raised you were being accuse of insights insurrection against your own country you're being accused of supporting violent uprising against capitol building and i want to give you a few minutes to respond to this without disruption go right ahead sir. >> thank you for that. you know, first of all, i'll say those peel out there who say that what i did and senator cruz

and 140 house republican who is objected in my case i say that state of pennsylvania in order to have the debate about election integrity, in order to make sure that we get legislation that is passed i think we need election reformsening we need to ban ballot harvesting i think we need to take hard look at how the mail-in ballots was administered in many of the states including pennsylvania. which did not follow their own law as you just alluded to. and with a liberal said because you did that, you effectively insited violence they know it is a lie they said you wanted to overturn the election. that is a lie. they know that it's a lie they said that, you know, it is equivalent to a violent insurrection the objection you raise that's a lie. the truth is mark, that democrats after republicans won the white house democrats every single time raised objections to various states in electoral college in 2001. in 2005, in 2017, and you know what, they're permitted to do so the constitution and the laws

and rules of congress allow them to do so. but it's perfectly legitimate when republicans do the same thing for legitimate reasons. which is what i did and senator cruz and other senators and representatives so whaing we're seeing now is -- an attempt by the left to lie about our motivations to lie about our actions in order to grab power. they want to silence the senate and silence me i tell you right now i'm not going to back down before a liberal mob. mark: you know senator, you're exactly right you see the kind of repression that is taking place now. simon and schuester my publisher was your publisher sean hannity publisher tucker carlson publisher went out of their way to cut your arrange wment them and you went to prior publisher good for them they're going publish your book your intook a rational book about the constitution. there's nothing inciteful if

that whatsoever. but when you watch msnbc and cnn you listen to language use by host and guests comparing president trump to hitler you read the philadelphia inquire other day there's an op-ed piece, of course, you can mention trump in the same context as hitler and third reich things that are said by left are so contemptible yet they never insight anything apparently when we come back here's my question to you you see now as you point out this poison spreading it is publishers -- it is newspapers. it's big tech. and big tech is really exercising enormous power on behalf of the left and the democrat party and against people who disagree with it. twitter, facebook, google, and all of the rest. what can we do about that? and if the democrat party doesn't want to do anything about it, since it benefits from this, really where do we go next?

because you can see these, this has worked to destroy best again parler, rumble other entrepreneurs trying to create competitionings complicated question i know an give you plenty of time to whans we come back. we'll be right back. nicorette knows, quitting smoking is freaking hard. you get advice like: try hypnosis... or... quit cold turkey. kidding me?! instead, start small. with nicorette. which can lead to something big. start stopping with nicorette

your grooming business is booming. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from a resume data base. claim your seventy-five-dollar credit when you post your first job at indeed.com/groomer when you switch to xfinity mobile, you're choosing to get connected to the most reliable network nationwide,

now with 5g included. discover how to save up to $300 a year with shared data starting at $15 a month, or get the lowest price for one line of unlimited. come into your local xfinity store to make the most of your mobile experience. you can shop the latest phones, bring your own device, or trade in for extra savings. stop in or book an appointment to shop safely with peace of mind at your local xfinity store.

mark: welcome back senator josh hawley well, what do you make of all of these attacks on freedom of speech and communication in this country now? >> well you had it right when you said the all what we have unprecedented concentration of power by corporate monoopenlies working in league with the left i call them the woke capitalist they're only interested in capitalism so as far as they can control it and use it to impose their view points on the american public. you know our founders they were against monopolies they really hated monopolies they were very weary of monopolies and rightfully so because when you concentrate power in a few hands bad things always happen that's what's happening now you have big tech companies who effectively control morer a more speech in america we've seen how they want to use that they want to shut down conservative and shut down libertarian and take out competitors like parler. they want to tell you what you can and cannot say. and it's not just the tech

companies. it is also the corporate monopolies in other areas we've had -- a corporate monopoly come at me said i'm not welcome to do political events. on their properties and they've gone after others small business people and so we're going boy boycott you if you support conservative or senator and people like that so you have unprecedented monopoly power working with big government in the left and you ask we break it up. we've got to break unthe monopoly and we have antitrust law it is a conservative principle conservative populous principle when we wrote most of those laws over a century ago it is very in tune with our founding we have to break up that concentrated power. and return power to the people. mark: you know what's interesting to me you talk antitrust laws a little over 100 years ago first one and others they broke up -- standard oil and they broke up other companies and so forth. they don't have nearly the power of these big tech companies. and we used to use phrases like

robert barrons we don't use anymore these are people who are stealing our speech, who are undermining our constitutional system from the outside. and the problem is, senator, i'm concerned that we have one party or one ideology that doesn't much mind it. because it is serving their purposes. much like joe biden's signing one exec teff order after another like he's some kind of monarch substituting his idea for the legislative process much like the democrat leader in the senate who is trying to figure out ways to get around other 50 republican senators trying to figure out ways to krupght corrupt the supreme court and i can go on and on we're dealing with a different animal now aren't we in the democrat party in the ideology that they're pushing. >> we really are we're dealing with a party now that loves the idea of concentrated power. that loves the idea of power gathered into a few hands. i mean, they really are they're the party of the powerful no doubt about it they are party of

the biggest monopoly corporation and party of big tech. they're the party of hollywood, of course, and have been for years. but this is the party that democrats they love what tech is doing. what they tech destroyed parler destroyed a competitor you talk antitrust violation in thes cheered them on they want that was wonderful when tech is censoring conservatives kicking them off platform they thought that was wonderful they want them to do more and what they want to do is use these corporations as the hand of government they want to have the corporations go out and do all of the regulation. but of course have none of the accountability that's why i say this is something we've not seen in america before we have the most powerful corporations in the history of the world in these tech companies. the democrats are standing with them should or to shoulder. and the solution is the time honored solution in this country which is we don't like concentrated power. we always disperse it we give power to the people that's what our constitution is based on. and that's what we need to get back to.

mark: you know senator, this past week we saw something that i was very excited about. what i've coined reddit revolution. you have these big hedge fund companies and wall street. they're deciding which businesses live and die particularly these retail businesses that are having a tough time. so they go after gamestop they're going after another -- and these young people are saying wait a minute. they're buying short, let's buy the stock and drive it up. you know, dwoak this too and we'll make money too. and so it starts on reddit and it spreads i know even my kids were involved in it to some extent and i'm thinking to myself. you know what, it is about damn time. what do you think? >> well, i think that it is -- it is wonderful to see wall street these big huge funds and then platforms like the robinhood platform i think it is call that had collude with them exposed. and you see the same thing mark attempted control, i mean, when these day traitders retail investors start to have a big effect on the market.

what are these plays form do you can't trade anymore now we're going shout you down and here's that i think really gets me these day traders these retail investors that i have been subjected to more criticism and more scriewtny by the wall street types than the people who single-handedly crash the financial system and in 2008 and got bailed out by the government. so it is an incredible double standard they have exposed that double standard. and it goes back to concentrated power whether it is a wall street whether it is with tech. we need to go after it and we need to let everyday folks have their share have their power. what that's what constitution says we the people. and that's what we need to be about. glark is washington what you thought and senate what you thought it would be when you first ran for office? >> you know, i have to say that, i think the senate that the body it is just an institution that these days jus really isn't interested in fulfilling constitutional responsibilities look at joe biden right now governing this country by

executive order and senate is happy to go along with it and i have to say and my short two years in washington i've seen the senate over and over -- defer deflect, not do its job and, i mean, this is increasingly we're not governed by elected representatives anymore. we're governed by bureaucrats and orders from the top down. we're governed by unelected administrators. this is a huge constitutional problem. and i think it is time that elected representatives actually did their job, took their oath seriously said, i'm actually going to -- be part of the governing this country i'm actually going to stand up for my constituents and not this country be governed by executive fiat. mark: i'll thank you very much there's many people backing what you're trying to do god bless you sir. >> thank you. mark: we'll be right back.

.. these are all great. and when you get a big deal... ♪♪ ...you feel like a big deal. ♪♪ priceline. every trip is a big deal.

fine, no one leaves the table until your finished. fine, we'll sleep here. ♪♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win. in a recent clinical study, patients using salonpas patch reported reductions in pain severity, using less or a lot less oral pain medicines. and improved quality of life. that's why we recommend salonpas. it's good medicine. mark: welcome back.

back in the 1840s, marx was never more powerful. he had an enormous influence particularly among intellectuals around the world, particularly in the united states. in the 1870s it had the wind at its back. intellectuals from john dewey and wood rove wilson pressed hard the progressive agenda. the progressive agenda is only limited by one thing. the united states constitution. it breaks up power. the states are sovereign. the tenths amendment. whatever powers are not in the constitution belong to the state. tart cal one the congress, within each those, there are specific powers that are outlined as is the rest of the

constitution construct that way. you have a bill of rights that protects the individual from government. the first memo key, the fourth, fifth, and niengt amendments those are all to protect you. but the progressive movement doesn't look at you as an individual. it looks at you as a grieve. ding a a group. that's why we are confronting the democratic party where you have a president signing fiats one after another. we have a congress looking to get around the constitution and destroy separation of powers. the democratic party is trying to enshrine its power forever more. the framers and the rat fires in the states would be repulsed

by what's taking place in this country. of course, the media they protected was to protect us from what's taking place in the united states today. but instead they are the mouth pieces. the propagandists. see you next time on "life, liberty & levin." jesse: welcome to "watters' world," i'm jesse watters. turning texas blue. that's the subject of tonight's watters words. joe biden's immigration agenda has one goal, flip texas blue. if that happens, you will never see another republican in the white house. china and the mexican drug cartels are in on the flip. it's a deadly alliance and we'll explain how it works. joe biden triggers a surge at the border. during the campaign he said we'll give illegal