On Monday’s Mark Levin Show, not a single media outlet acknowledged that this program in March of 2017 pieced together the public reporting and deduced that Trump and his campaign were spied on. At the time the cowardly media lambasted this program as engaging in tinfoil hat conspiracy theories. Shame on them. Then, Special Counsel John Durham has filed a motion on a potential conflict of interest of Michael Sussman’s attorneys indicating that Sussman’s counsel may be representing someone else related to the case. Later, Hans Mahncke from the Epoch Times calls in to discuss the story he broke that Trump was spied on while he was President. The additional spying was aided by an executive from an internet company and did so at the behest of the Hillary Clinton campaign. Afterward, Mark Meckler the founder of the Convention of States movement joins the show with an update.
THIS IS FROM:
Rumble
LEVIN FLASHBACK: Evidence Is Overwhelming That Trump Was Spied On
Rumble
FLASHBACK 60 Minutes to Trump: There’s No Evidence Of Spying
The Federalist
Special Counsel: Democrats Framed And Spied On Trump While He Was President
DNYUZ
Inside McConnell’s Campaign to Take Back the Senate and Thwart Trump
Washington Post
A weakened Trump? As some voters edge away, he battles parts of the Republican Party he once ran.
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Image used with permission of Getty Images / Chip Somodevilla
Rough transcript of Hour 1
Hour 1 Segment 1
I just want to give credit where credit is due to all the hosts, guests, experts on cable TV, including my colleagues at my favorite cable spot and all over radio for reminding the American people that it was nearly five years ago to the day. That on this very radio show, we revealed. That Trump Trump world. Had been or was being spied upon. Actually, none of that happened today other than Pete Hegseth over the weekend and Hannity. Not a single broadcaster. Certainly not at the national level. On cable. Or conservative talk radio. Bother to go back in history. We’re not telling them to go back into ancient history or the revolutionary period or the civil war period just a few years back. When I revealed. Just by pulling together the leaks that had been in the media. When I reveal what was a March 2nd or 3rd, Mr. Producer, the 3rd of March 2017, what I saw in the media because nobody put it together, I came under vicious attack by the very media who had published these reports. And got no support except from maybe two or three of my colleagues, none. And I went toe to toe with the Associated Press and Reuters, I went toe to toe with CNN and The New York Times in The Washington Post, I went toe to toe with all on pretty much alone. And that was OK. Now you see folks all over TV. The senators lining up, the congressmen lining up. The commentators from all kinds of backgrounds lining up, telling you they knew it. Are telling you that Bill Barr, when he was attorney general, said at a hearing. That, yes, he believes Trump was spied on. Six months after I mentioned this, six months. The only news outlet that I’m aware of. That was interested in even contacting me to discuss this was Fox News digital, not Fox News. Not Fox Business News. Certainly not CNN or MSNBC, certainly not The Washington Post or the new just them, that’s it. Now, why does this matter, you ask? What has happened to me? But that story was blown off, that story was rejected when Donald Trump picked it up, when Joel Pollak at Breitbart picked up what I had said that day. They came under attack, too. Oh, he uses the word wiretap. The word wiretap was used because it was in a headline in The New York Times, which they eventually changed when people said, can you prove a wiretap? And of course, I made the point I can’t prove anything, I don’t have subpoena power, I don’t have a grand jury. But I have the media platform one after another. Reporting leaks about what took place. So shame on the phony news platforms today that pretend that broadcast on this program on March 3rd never occurred. Shame on the phony news platforms today that pretend the Fox and Friends Sunday show I did with Pete Hegseth, among others, on March 5th, 2017, never existed. Shame on the phony news platforms to pretend that the next night on Hannity, March six, 2017, that my discussion of this never existed. The reason is, ladies and gentlemen, and the reason this is important is because the media were involved, the media knew a lot of this and covered it up. And the media today are doing the same thing. They act like this is a snore job, a snooze job, it’s no big deal, it’s a big deal on this. And Russia and Ukraine are the two big subjects of the day I want to discuss, but not the only ones. Because I also want you to know how Mitch McConnell is sabotaging conservatives and sabotaging the conservative base the way he did with the Tea Party. And hopefully today we’ll have time for that to. Now, of course, every particular what Mr. Daum is finding out through his criminal investigation, how could I possibly know that I didn’t do a criminal investigation? I don’t have the authority to do a criminal investigation. And to the extent anything I said was inaccurate, it was inaccurate because the media were inaccurate for which they’ve never apologized. And I gave the source in each example. This is exhibit one and two and three and four. And where did I get it from? And the media said I was lying, that I was a conspiracy theorist, how could I be lying or conspiracy theories when I’m regurgitating what they printed? But they said. That put them in a tough position, of course, I got almost no backing from conservatives and talk radio or on cable TV because they’re cowards. A handful that stood up. Are clearly in good stead, but the rest are just cowards. They talk tough. They wanted nothing to do with this. But what’s right is right, and even today, even today, you see these news reporters breaking their backs to try and avoid what was said on March 3rd, March 5th and March 6th right here. Right here. It’s hard to avoid it when if you do a Google search, there I am. But they managed to do it, even my colleagues, they managed to do it. Now, let’s begin. Fox and Friends, March five, twenty, seventeen, but one go on your Thursday evening radio broadcast, you laid out a devastating case about executive overreach of the Obama administration, which many believe metamorphosis itself to tweets that President Trump sent out on Saturday morning accusing potential wiretapping in Trump Tower. We want to give you a case here this morning to lay out what you know, what you know about it and the evidence you have for the potential executive overreach of the Obama administration. Well, pleasure to be here. The evidence before we go on here, I am alive. There’s no way in hell this Obama administration, Obama, Biden administration didn’t know. What was going on with the Hillary Clinton campaign? There’s no way in hell the FBI intel side and the intelligence services didn’t know. That this private firm hired by the Clinton campaign, no way they didn’t know that they weren’t involved in. Tapping into the Trump Tower servers. To try and set up a fake Russian narrative, they knew all about it. There’s no way they couldn’t have known. Go ahead, President Trump’s tweeting this is about the Obama administration’s spying and the question isn’t whether it’s spied. We know they went to the FISA court twice. The question is, who did they spy on the extent of the spying? That is the Trump campaign, the Trump transition, Trump surrogates. And I want to walk you through this, the American. Let’s stop now because we have a hard break coming up. And I don’t want to cut it short and you’ll see how we get into this. And then I want to talk about what Dorham has found and what he’s pursuing and how he’s now accelerating his investigation because people are coming forward. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 2
It’s a pretty good summary at the. Federalised miners March 2017, of course, but that’s been par for the course. Enemies of Donald Trump surveil the Internet traffic at Trump Tower at his New York City apartment building and later at the executive office of the president of the United States, then fed disinformation about the traffic to intelligence. He’s hoping to frame Trump as a Russian connected stooge. That’s her first paragraph. Here I am five years ago. Cut to go. Exhibit one, exhibit one. This is all Public Head Street. Two separate sources with links to the counterintelligence community have confirmed that the FBI sought and was granted a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court. This is spying in October. You mean counterintelligence permission to examine the activity of, quote, U.S. persons in Donald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia? Let me go on, since it’s me. They say the first FISA request sources say name Trump was denied back in June, denied by the court, but the second was drawn more narrowly and was granted in October after evidence was presented of a server possibly related to the Trump campaign and its alleged links to two banks. Now, sources suggest that they stopped their server. Trump Tower servers were the subject, according to. Dorham. Of the so-called private party operatives paid for by Hillary Clinton, so the newspaper report had it partly right, not completely right, but so what? This should have been enough for somebody to investigate. Go ahead. The full content of emails and other related documents that may concern US persons. Now, I know people are hung up with Trump’s word wiretapping. Well, how do they get access to the server information? Does it really matter if it was wiretapping, electronic surveillance or whatever it was? Exhibit to The Guardian, a well-known right wing British paper. Here it is. Quote, The Guardian has learned the FBI applied for a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court over the summer in order to monitor for members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. Keep in mind, this is drawing a presidential election. The sitting president, the incumbent party is now investigating the presidential candidate of the Republican Party and his campaign. To some extent, the FISA court turned down the application, asking FBI counterintelligence investigators to narrow its focus. According to one report, the FBI was finally granted a warrant in October. Exhibit three McClatchy, another well-known right wing newspaper. Here they have the agency’s headline, FBI. Five other agencies, five other Obama administration agencies probe possible covert Kremlin aide to Trump. The FBI and five other law enforcement intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from Kremlin covertly aided presidential. Donald Trump now remember. Now remember, ladies and gentlemen, this guy, Michael Sussman, who work with allies such as Perkins Coie law firm, he was working for Hillary Clinton in her campaign. He went to the FBI and pressed exactly this case. So he had some success. Throughout the bureaucracy, I don’t think we know in any way the full extent of this yet. Go ahead. The matter said the agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, and representatives of the director of the National Intelligence. Are you telling me Barack Obama didn’t know it was as agencies as you. Hold on. How are you not. OK, you go. I’m not done. I need to make the case because the media seems to be confused about their own reporting. New York Times, another well-known liberal outlet, intercepted Russian communications part of inquiry into Trump Associates, January 19. The FBI is leading the investigations aided by the NSA, the CIA, Treasury Department’s financial crimes unit. The investigators have accelerated their efforts in recent weeks, but have found no exclusive, conclusive evidence of wrongdoing. Listen to this. One official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretap communications have been provided to the White House. Now it. That word wiretap was in The New York Times piece and in the headline of that piece. And then changed. If Philip Bump wants to know, if anybody wants to know, it’s very simple to find out. And I pointed that out at the time. It was The New York Times that said there were wiretaps. So why are you attacking Donald Trump or me? Go ahead. The New York Times, another week for another, right wing outlets continue, The New York Times again. NSA gets more latitude to share intercepted communications in the final days of the Obama administration. The administration has expanded the power of the NSA to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government, 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protection. Now, why would they do this on the way out the door? Well, March one, Exhibit six, Obama administration rushed to preserve intelligence of Russian election hacking in the Obama administration’s last days. Listen to this. Some White House officials scramble to spread information about Russian efforts to undermine the presidential election and about possible contacts between associates of President elect Trump and Russians across the government. I’m not done. Exhibit seven New York Times Flynn is said to have talked to Russians about sanctions. Trump took office. Well, where do they get this information? Well, Mark, you know, the FISA court, they’re always monitoring the the Russian ambassador. So how do we know that? Maybe they are. Maybe they’re not. But there’s an awful lot of other activity here. We have Washington Post, one more Washington Post, March 2nd. U.S. investigators have examined complexed Attorney General Sessions had with Russian officials during the time he was advising Donald Trump’s campaign. The focus of the US counterintelligence investigation has been on communication between Trump campaign officials in Russia. Listen to this. The inquiry involving Sessions is examining his contacts while serving as Trump’s foreign policy adviser. This is how they got sessions to refuse. They dragged him into the investigation more when I returned.
Hour 1 Segment 3
By the way, Canada is now officially a police state. They’re starting to arrest truckers to make an example, Trudeau has grabbed more emergency powers. To crush the truckers than the president of Ukraine is. Grabbed emergency powers to prepare for the Russia attack. And this is typical, I’m afraid of. Have Western leftists. Who believe that their people should conform, whether their people like it or not, in the name of the people, of course. All right, let’s go on. So I continued with the wonderful Pete Hegseth on Fox and Friends Sunday, I think it was. Cut. Let’s see. Cut to go, as you do on your radio program, you lay out a devastating case based on public documents, as you point out, and not right wing sources, but mainstream left stream sources. How confident are you that this new this investigation, which was on Russian so-called Russian hacking, but now the White House says this morning will be broadened to looking into executive overreach? How come they may find something there? I don’t know, but they already found something. The issue isn’t whether the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign or transition or certain of its surrogates, the issues, the extent of it. They went into court a second time. They were so aggressive, they waited four or five months. They go back in October, weeks before the general election. They narrow their request. All of a sudden we have leaks coming out on Slinn. Then we have a whole horrible meeting that took place between sessions and so forth. And I’m telling you, as a former chief of staff to an attorney general of the United States in the Reagan administration, these are police state tactics. Now, what did Barack Obama know? You know, everything. I just read you part apart from one or two articles. You know, I know it’s in the newspapers. It’s right there. So Barack Obama not only knew this, but he gets a daily intelligence briefing. And let me tell you something about daily intelligence briefings. If you’re attorney general and your FBI is going to the FISA court to get a warrant to investigate aspects of an opposition party in the middle of a general election campaign, how much you want to bet the president of the United States knew that? I don’t want to get information. Mm hmm. Next, cut three, how does this play out in the media? How are they going to continue to cover this story? Let me first say this is the case made by The New York Times, The Washington Post, McClatchy and the rest of them. I just put it together as a former Justice Department official. And and Donald Trump here is being attacked for what he tweeted. Donald Trump is the victim. His campaign is the victim. His transition team is the victim. His surrogates are the victim. These are police state tactics. I am telling you this as a former chief of staff to an attorney general, if this had been done to Barack Obama, all hell would break loose and it should. And Barack Obama’s statement is pathetic. Mark, let me just say this. Where does it go from here? They ought to release both FISA court applications where they sought the one the one in the summer and the one in October. So we know exactly what they were doing. That’s number one. Number two, Congress needs to see the daily presidential intelligence briefings over the past year or so. Those are the beginnings of a serious investigation. Number three, for the Republicans in Congress who control the majority if the Democrats do not want to assist and they won’t because I’m starting to think Chuck Schumer and the others are participating in all this cover up activity, then plow ahead without them. But this is what I know. Although I suspected it, Hillary Clinton and the DNC were up to their eyeballs in this activity. How much you want to bet Pelosi knew about it and Schumer knew about it in the others, why would the DNC and Hillary Clinton keep it from the leaders? Of the Democrat Party in the House and the Senate, they wouldn’t. Go ahead. We cannot have a sitting presidential administration unleashing six federal agencies, intelligence and law enforcement. I don’t mean the president personally sitting there saying, you know what, Valerie, let’s go get them. Obviously, the attorney general and the FBI were involved in this. This is how you get a FISA court application prepared and submitted. Do you think do you think former President Obama was involved in this? And if so, how much was he involved? I’m not Nostradamus here. I just think that we ought to find out. But I will tell you this. He’s more involved than he says. I mean, it’s his executive branch. It’s his Justice Department to the IRS. All of a sudden, the IRS is targeting American citizens. I don’t know anything about it. We have reporters, including James Rosen, the AP, where where the Obama administration did more investigations and reporters than any administration in American history. They’re quite capable of these things, but it doesn’t matter. We want to know what took place. And there ought to be public hearings on this stuff, too. I agree with the Democrats. Let’s get to the bottom of this. So join me. Join us. This is the public record. It’s the newspaper of record, The New York Times. Let’s go. No, I was way out front on this, was I not? I was just stating what I read. Five years later, they pretend none of this was said Mr.. None of it. They pretend none of it was said media pretend none of it’s even going on today because they were participants in this. And then rather than debate me on their own reporting, whether the reporting was accurate with Anonymous or rather than willingly doing that, this is what happened. Cat five go. White House officials say that the president sources were various conservative outlets, most prominently perhaps radio host Mark Levin, who seemed to take three basic chunks of information and combine them into one conspiracy theory of what he calls a silent coup. And on the conservative Breitbart website, which Friday, by the way, Brian Ross is gone and. Nobody’s heard from him since. Go ahead, radio talk show host Mark Levin. Now, the story asserted that Obama has been trying to undermine Trump at every turn. As you can see from the headline, it was inspired by a Thursday night radio segment by conservative talk show host Mark Levin. Apparently, this idea came from right wing radio host and unlicensed gynecologist Mark Levin, who ranted about these wiretaps on his radio show. That show was then written up by Breitbart as Mark Levin to Congress investigate Obama’s silent coup. Now, what he doesn’t say, of course. And he is a licensed proctologist, by the way, what he doesn’t say, of course, is the word wiretaps was in The New York Times piece and in their headline. See, they don’t want to debate or discuss. What the reporters had said, go ahead, what does the White House gain by the president, not by Steve, and most likely handing the president the United States card card? I call and and and talking about what a rabid right wing talk show host has been thinking. And I love each other. By the way, Breitbart, congratulations to them. And Joel, they had guts. They saw what I was saying was correct and they added additional information. Now, National Public Radio go ahead with a firebrand conservative radio host, Mark Levin, briefly, for people who don’t know who is he? He’s got quite a following. And he’s not just a conservative figure, but often espousing relatively radical positions about the need to reinvent the Constitution and the government in ways in which we think about society. The notion that Mark Levin is a news outlet. It’s just not The New York Times. It’s not The Washington Post. It’s not The Wall Street Journal. It’s not the polarity here is he’s gone, too. But even more, he’s citing papers in some cases that I cited for the information that I stopped that that I shared with you. Go ahead. Internews Network is Mark Levin, a guy who wrote I know and wrote talk radio guys do on left and right, mostly right. They rob Brown people up with outrageous charges and nobody keeps count of them as here’s a president on stage getting his information from these people, getting his information from these people. Again, these are public reports. Go ahead. Suggesting President Obama has committed a crime seems pretty thin. The detailed speculation from the spirit get into the country. And he’s still here. Still here. Go ahead and talk show host Mark Levin. OK, thank you. 60 Minutes, October, twenty six. Twenty twenty. Lesley Stahl, who is a real news person, don’t you know, interviewing the president, Donald Trump, this is way ahead. October 26, 2020. This is three and a half years after my radio show. Go ahead. So the biggest scandal was when they spied on my campaign. They spied on my campaign. There’s no real evidence of that cause there is no other place. Leslie, they spied on my campaign and they got. Can I say something? You know, this is 60 Minutes and we can’t put on things. We can’t put it on because what a condescending. Jack. Yes, go ahead, including things we can’t very Leslie, they spy to my camp, but we can’t verify. Totally verify, no. It’s been just go down and get the papers, they spied on my campaign, they got caught. No, and then they went much further than that and they got caught. And you will see that, Leslie, and you know that. But you just don’t want to know. As a matter of fact, I don’t know that the president said, just look at the papers. All I did is put it all together. And then the media. They weren’t sure whether they condemned themselves to condemn each other, so they just decided to attack little old me Kiran, John, here at the White House press briefing today. Do we know what outlet she works for, Mr. Producer? I don’t think we do. Oh, she’s Saki’s deputy, Jackie Heinrich of Fox does pose some good questions. Cut seven go. Does the president have any concerns about a candidate for president using computer experts to infiltrate computer systems of competing candidates or even the president elect to you for the goal of creating a narrative? Is that something that that’s something I can’t speak to from this podium? So I refer you to the Department of Justice. What was described in that report, monitoring Internet traffic, is that spying? Again, I can’t speak to that report. I refer you to the Department of Justice, generally speaking, with monitoring Internet traffic, intercepting the change. I refer you to Department of Justice. I can’t tomorrow, but I just keep regurgitating the same thing. That’s what they told me to do. I really can’t comment on this. I can’t do it. Go ask Justice, the Department of Injustice. Oh, I’m sure they’re all over it. Hillary Clinton’s campaign used these intermediaries. On the Trump Tower servers and beyond that, ladies and gentlemen. Remember early on, you heard me read from an article that talked about two servers. In Trump Tower. That report was pretty close. When we come back, I will give you a little bit more detail so you fully understand what it is that Durham has found and what he’s pursuing. I’ll be right back.
Hour 1 Segment 4
Let me be blunt. Hillary Clinton should be in prison and she should be doing a lot of years. The idea that people who trespass were operating on government property on January 6th are in jail and Hillary Clinton is in Westchester enjoying herself. Is really appalling to me. It’s disgusting. Yet this is the situation while the rush fails in America. They Raso philes. They have egg all over their faces, but they don’t know what they’re blinded by their own scrambled eggs. And they’re scrambled brains. The defenders of Putin. Pathetic, but more on that later. Let’s get started again, Margaret Cleveland, the Federalist, a tangential filing on Friday in the criminal case against former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman revealed these new details uncovered by special counsel John Durham’s investigation. What details? Enemies of Trump surveil the Internet traffic at Trump Tower at his New York City apartment building and later at the executive office of the president, the United States, in order to feed disinformation to the intelligence agencies which ran with it. How do we know? You heard what I said five years ago. The revelation came in the middle of a 13 page motion Dorm’s prosecutors filed on the criminal case against Sussman. The special counsel’s office charged Sussman in September 2021 and a one count indictment of lying to James Baker during a meeting. He was the general counsel of the FBI in the weeks leading up to the 2016 election. This is an insurrection, ladies and gentlemen. That’s what it was during Sussman’s September 19, 2016, meeting with Baker. He had allegedly provided the FBI general counsel information that purported to show the existence of a secret communication channel between the Trump Organization and the Russian Alpha Bank. The indictment charge that Susman told Baker during that meeting, he was not working on behalf of any client when, according to the indictment, he was actually acting on behalf quote of a U.S. technology industry executive at a U.S. Internet company, unquote, later identified as Rodney Jaffe and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign. While the special counsel’s indictment of the Clinton campaign lawyer was by itself huge news, the details Daum sprinkled throughout the 27 pages of the talking indictment suggest even more bombshells are to come. Those allegations suggest, quote, a scandal much deeper than merely Sussman’s role in a second Russian hoax, a scandal that entangles the Clinton campaign, multiple Internet companies to federally funded university researchers and a complicit media, unquote. All right, Philip Bump, we’ll get to you later. The talking indictment filed against Sussman soon proved to be the first of many talking legal documents. Dorm’s team filed with the court a little more than a month after charging Sussman dorm. Final response to Sussman’s motion for a bill of particulars, a motion that asked the court to order Daum to provide more details about his alleged crime. So he did. A discovery update filed in late January added even more texture to the charge against Sussman and the broader investigation Gorm exposed even more intriguing the clarification to the discovery update he filed a few days later in Friday’s motion, formally a motion to inquire into potential conflicts of interest, Daum continued providing the public an update on select portions of the special counsel’s probe. Now. Why did he file a motion on a potential conflict of interest? Quote, The special counsel’s office opened the motion by explaining it believes Sussman’s current counsel, Latham and Watkins, may have potential conflicts of interest that could affect its representation of Sussman. Those potential conflicts likely could be addressed with a knowing and voluntary waiver by the defendant upon consultation on conflict free counsel. In other words, this counsel is either representing somebody else involved in this matter. Well, that’s got to be the reason. And so the question is, if the council is using the representation of one person to glean information in defense of another. Now we have a break, it’s the top of the hour. Such is the nature of commercial radio.