ST. LOUIS — Mark McCloskey is a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate in Missouri. The primary is August 2. One Republican will go on to face candidates of other parties in the general election in November.
The political world may have little known nor long remembered the name Mark McCloskey had it not been for the police killing of George Floyd. When protesters marched through the streets of the Central West End neighborhood in the summer of 2020, McCloskey, a personal injury attorney, grabbed his gun and stood guard outside his luxurious home.
KNOW TO VOTE: Missouri primary 2022: Voter guide for St. Louis area
The tense confrontation that followed placed McCloskey at the epicenter of a national conversation about race, privilege, police violence, unruly protest, gun rights, and prosecutorial discretion.
After a grand jury indicted McCloskey and his wife on felony charges for the unlawful use of a weapon and tampering with evidence, the Republican National Convention invited them to address the party faithful. Governor Parson later pardoned the pair.
RELATED: Gov. Parson pardons Mark, Patricia McCloskey of charges related to pointing guns at protesters
McCloskey’s campaign website prominently features the image of him brandishing a high-powered semi-automatic rifle outside his home. Polling shows McCloskey has so far struggled to parlay his newfound celebrity into much real-world political support.
5 On Your Side candidate survey
To the extent any single member of Congress can influence the U.S. economy and labor market, what immediate steps would you take to reduce the cost of living burden Missourians face during this period of inflation?
McCloskey: Stop spending money. Stop spending fictitious federal dollars. Deregulate the economy. Promote the petroleum industry. Bring back energy independence so that we can keep the prices of energy down. I mean, when I was on the Trump campaign, when we had created the highest or best economy in the history of the country, lowest unemployment rates for everybody, essentially zero inflation.
We did so by reducing the gove-rnment's burden on the on the economy, reducing regulation, encouraging entrepreneurship, and keeping the federal government's hands out everybody's pockets. That's the best way to beat inflation right now. This inflation is directly related to the unlimited spending, trillions of dollars of fiat money generated for the purposes of fulfilling these false narratives of the federal government.
Missouri state law prohibits women and girls from seeking abortion procedures at any time during their pregnancy, regardless of circumstances involving rape, incest, or other unwanted or unplanned pregnancies. Would you support a similar law at the federal level? If not, then which women or girls should be allowed access to safe, legal abortion procedures?
McCloskey: That's a loaded question on the false premise that there should be no federal laws on abortion. That's a state rights issue. We got the little thing called the Constitution of the United States, not a very big document. And the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is real simple. It says, hang on, let me read it for you. So the power is not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectively or to the people.
The federal government's got no business playing with abortion law. That's a state issue. It's something that should be left to the people of the states in the state legislatures.
What specific policies or practices would you support from Congress that could directly improve safety and reduce violent crime in Missouri?
McCloskey: Well, I don't know what the Senate has to do with it. Most violent crime is a local issue. I think most violent crime is on a state and county level of law enforcement. Of course, to the extent that there is any federal movement about to defund police or replace policemen with social justice or or, you know, welfare workers. That needs to be done.
But I think I once again, I'm a big believer in limiting federal power to those things, specifically granted to the federal government under the Constitution. And I don't think that the federal government should be involved in local law enforcement. I think that's up to the local prosecutor.
What do you perceive as the single greatest threat to American democracy and how would you address it in Congress?
McCloskey: The Chinese Communist Party. There's no question that the Chinese Communist Party poses the greatest threat to the United States. They vow every day to destroy us economically, militarily and socially. We have grown them from being a nonentity under the false pretense that we were going to grow them into a democracy by letting them into the World Trade Organization and giving them privileges that they do not deserve. We have grown them into our greatest adversary and the only nation on earth which has a power to, and the desire to destroy us. And that's the greatest threat to American democracy.
To what extent do fossil fuels contribute to the changing climate? To what extent should Congressional action attempt to alter that trajectory?
McCloskey: Once again, a false pretense question. You know, NASA says---
5 On Your Sider Political Editor Mark Maxwell: It's an open question.
McCloskey: Well, well, no, no, no, you. It's premised upon fossil fuels being related to a change in the climate. Since 1880, the average global temperature has increased a grand total of 1.4%, according to NASA. Do you know what the hottest day on record today is? July the 22nd in St Louis, 110 degrees in 1934. Do you think we're burning more fossil fuels now? Do you think there may be more cars now than there were in 1934?
The concept that fossil fuels are leading to a significant change in the climate is not true. It's a myth made up to control the West and weaken Western economies. You don't ask that question of the red Chinese. You don't ask that question of the nation of India. What you do is you impose restrictions on the American economy to undermine the American economy, weaken us and destroy our nation. And that's why I believe all this climate change nonsense is about.
Public polling shows most Americans believe the U.S. Supreme Court has become too political. What reforms, if any, should Congress take to reshape or reimagine the makeup or behavior of the court?
McCloskey: All right. Go back to this little document here. Constitution of the United States, Article three says the judicial power of the United States should be vested in one Supreme Court. Follow the Constitution. People who are now told by the media, including folks like your station, that the Supreme Court, by applying the Constitution to issues, are being political, is a false narrative once again.
When I read through your questions that it occurred to me that every question was based on false narratives, based on leftist beliefs. The concept. Well, when you asked your question based on the vast majority of Americans believe that the Supreme Court is no longer apolitical. That's a mythology which has been created by the Left for the purposes of trying to convince people that there's something wrong with the current makeup of the Supreme Court. To call enforcing the Constitution and being a constitutional originalist is being political is like saying, because we're standing our ground and not sinking into the earth, we somehow being apolitical or being political.
The Constitution defines the rights of the federal government and limits the federal government. This bold experiment in freedom that we call the United States of America was the first time in the history of the world where government was created from scratch to protect the people from the power of government, rather than give the government power over the people, and to call the Supreme Court's enforcement of those limitations on the powers of the federal government, political is just nonsense.
Maxwell: You're very interested in getting a civics lesson. We can point to the page in your pocket constitution that says How many justices should sit on a bench?
McCloskey: There is nothing in the Constitution that talks about how many justices there is.
Maxwell: That is the nature of my question--
McCloskey: No, no, no. Your question was based on the concept--
Maxwell: Should we reshape or reimagine the makeup or the number or the behavior of the political appointment process of the court. Can we get an answer to that? It's not a political question.
McCloskey: Well, it was, because it's based on the premise that the majority of people--
Maxwell: That's a fact. Public polling shows most Americans no longer believe. And by the way, ten years ago it was Republicans saying the court, because we have activist judges, all parties are guilty of saying the court is political.
McCloskey: No, but it's it's a difference because the judges are not supposed to be activists. The judges are supposed to interpret the Constitution. But it's like saying murder is against the law. And ten years ago, murder was legal. And therefore. Weren't you in favor of murder ten years ago? No.
The job of the Supreme Court of the United States is to apply the Constitution and decide what's constitutional and not to decide what the Constitution ought to be or might be or should be.
I'm happy with the number of justices on the Supreme Court. I'm happy with the selection process. But what's going on right now is we've got rule by intimidation. We've got Chuck Schumer standing on the courthouse steps threatening justices of the Supreme Court. We've got the president of the United States encouraging people to violate federal law. Joe Biden stood on the Capitol steps on January the 20th of 2021 and swore to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States. He's advocating violating federal law and encouraging people to protest the Supreme Court in order to intimidate justices of the Supreme Court.
I think that's an impeachable offense by itself. I'm happy with the current Supreme Court in number and manner of selection, and their job isn't to say what should be or might be or what they'd like to be, but to say what is under the Constitution.
Which Constitutional amendment is your favorite and why?
McCloskey: I would normally say the Second Amendment because, without the right to keep and bear arms, the rest of our freedoms are merely hypothetical. I mean, when the founders created the Second Amendment, it wasn't to, as Joe Biden would say, shoot Bambi wearing Kevlar. It was to make the federal government not the exclusive monopolistic power structure to keep the federal government from having an exclusive monopoly on power.
And but I'll say this, under the current environment, I think the most important amendment is the 10th Amendment limiting the federal government, keeping the federal government out of state's rights, and respecting the fact that this is a republic made up of 50 independent states with the federal government is there to provide for the common defense. And I think we need to limit that government again. This was supposed to be a government by the consent of the people. And it's time for us to pull back that consent and limit that government and give the states back the powers with the Constitution guarantees.
What is your favorite movie, most influential book, and go-to genre of music?
McCloskey: You know, the favorite movie I can do real easily. That's Life with Father something probably 99% of all your listeners have never heard of. But it's a fun movie about an eclectic family in New York City the in the turn of the last century. Favorite book: I'll tell you one thing that I found very influential. It's a book by a guy named H. Montgomery Heide called Stalin Portrait of a Dictator. Now, if you ever want to see what's going on in this country today, read that book. I like classic seventies rock and roll. I also like reggae.
