On Wednesday’s Mark Levin Show, the national debt in the United States is on an unsustainable course under the Biden Administration, which will lead to inflation, stagnation, and a depression. Our debt is currently at $33 trillion and rising because the establishment politicians in Washington spend like drunken Marxists. We had a taste of economic collapse during the pandemic, and when we have a full-blown depression, we will lose our civil society. Also, the Democrat party will sell its soul for votes, and they are supporting the pro-Hamas protesters, urging them to vote for President Biden because they are an anti-Semitic party. Meanwhile, they have a corrupt DOJ and special counsel that is destroying Donald Trump’s due process rights and interfering in the presidential election. The legal system is no longer a justice system and is instead being used to destroy justice, equal protection, and due process.
Fox Business
A million simulations show US debt is on an ‘unsustainable’ path
Washington Examiner
Trump prosecutor signals appeal in classified documents case, rebukes judge
Gregg Jarrett
The New York Judge Who Gagged Trump Should Recuse Himself
Post Millennial
DOJ sues Utah prisons after trans inmate castrates self in protest over delays for ‘gender-affirming’ care
Photo by Joe Raedle
The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.
Rough transcription of Hour 1
Segment 1
Hello, America. Mark Levin here. Our number 877-381-3811. 877-381-3811. I’m going to discuss something nobody discusses. A million simulations show that the debt in the United States is on an unsustainable path. US national debt is on unsustainable course simulation show. This is Fox Business. Wow. What does all that mean? What does that mean? Unsustainable ban. Well, what it means is we can have a depression. Inflation stagnation than inflation. Let’s let’s dig into this. The United States is almost certainly on an unsustainable path with regard to the astronomic rise in its national debt. According to a million simulations run by Bloomberg, a million computer simulations. Wow. Bloomberg reported that it conducted a million simulations on the U.S. debt outlook and found 88% of them borrowing. Is it on an unsustainable path? And the findings come after a forecast by the Congressional Budget Office that indicates the national debt will grow to an astounding 54 trillion in the next decade, next ten years. It’s at 34 trillion right now. The result of an ageing population, a rising federal health care cost. That’s not why. Because these these politicians spend like drunken Marxists. That’s why. Payments are expected to triple from nearly 475 billion in fiscal 2022 to a stunning 1.4 trillion in 2032. That’s interest. That’s payment for interest. In eight years, 1.4 trillion by 2053. 30 years from now, the interest payments are projected to surge to $5.4 trillion. To put it into perspective, that’ll be more than the US spends on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and all other mandatory and discretionary spending programs combined. Combined. When factoring in the market’s current outlook and interest rates, the debt to GDP ratio is expected to rise to 123% in 2034. Now, what does that mean? The debt to all the gross domestic product, that is all goods and services produced. The debt to GDP ratio means for every dollar that we produce in this country, we will owe the government a dollar and $0.23 in eight years. And yet they write That’s a fairly optimistic outlook, given the assumption of Washington that the sweeping tax law passed in 2017 by former President Trump will likely be extended. Notice how they always twist it. Notice the problem is always that they don’t tax has enough. You don’t get to keep enough of your money. The problem isn’t that they spend too damn much. Now, in a higher simulation scenario, the debt to GDP burden could be as high as 134% in 2030 for 185% in 2050. So that would mean in 26 short years for every dollar that we the people produce in goods and services. We will owe the government a dollar and $0.85. Should the debt materialize, that could risk America’s economic standing in the world. Are they out of their minds? Should the debt materialize? You’re going to need a wheelbarrow to move your money around. I’d like to always take these issues deeper. We sit here, we ring our hands, we shake our heads, and then I say to myself, but to the majority of the American people, but certainly a majority of the ruling class does not. Do they? You really give a damn about anything but today. Bernie Sanders. That’s all he’s about. Joe Biden. That’s all they’re about. What about tomorrow? What about our kids and grandkids and generations yet born? So I raise this question. You may have heard of this book, Plunder and Deceit. When I wrote this many years ago. Can we simultaneously love our children but betray their generation and generations yet born? Because that’s what we’re doing. Among the least acknowledged facts of American modernity is the extent to which parents acting in their familial capacity, naturally and tenaciously, guard their young children from threat and peril. To the point of risking their own physical and economic security in extreme cases, however, is part of the political and governing community. In other words, as the aggregate that is the ruling generation is what I call it. Many of these same parents, wittingly and unwittingly, join with other parents in tolerating, if not enthusiastically championing, disadvantageous and even grievous public policies that jeopardize not only their children’s future but the welfare of successive generations. This is why I cannot stay on the left. I cannot stand that because this is what they’re doing. To be clear, not all parental decisions are impactful or consequential in the lives of children. Obviously, not all decisions are equal. Indeed, the most attentive and nurturing parents are not and cannot be conscious of every decision they make. And as much as the totality of such decisions is likely incalculable. Even on a weekly or monthly basis and in the healthiest families, the most considered parental decisions based on seemingly prudential judgments can and do produce unintended consequences. Of course, the same can be said of decisions about public policy and governing in a relatively well-functioning community. But there are accepted norms of behavior, a moral order born of experience and knowledge, instinct and faith, teaching and reason and love and passion that provide definition for and boundaries between right and wrong, good and evil and fairness and injustice applicable to families and societies alike. Hence a harmony of virtuous interest informed by tried and true traditions, customs vows and institutions and cultivated within families and the larger community preserves and improves the human condition. One individual at a time, one generation to the next. Broadly speaking, this is called the civil society. The civil society. Edmund Burke, a political thinker, was born in Ireland and moved to England, where he became a prominent statesman in the 18th century. He explained that the civil society relies on an intergenerational continuum of the past, the living and the unborn. He wrote that as the end of such a partnership cannot be obtained in many generations, It becomes a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are dead and those who are yet to be born. In fact, Burke went further, warning that those who forsake this intergenerational continuum condemn themselves, their children and future generations to a grim existence, he said. One of the first and most leading principles on which the Commonwealth and the laws are consecrated is less the temporary possessors and life renters in it, unmindful of what they have received from their ancestors or what is due to their posterity, should act as if they were the entire masters, that they should not think it among their rights to cut off the entail or commit waste on the inheritance by destroying at their pleasure the whole original fabric of society. Hazarding to leave to those who come after them a ruin instead of a habitation. And teaching these successors is little to respect their contrivances that they had themselves respected the institutions of their forefathers. Genius. Absolute genius. And this is what’s happening in America. History confirms Burke’s observation to embrace the moral order as parents nurturing their children, yet to abandon the moral or more order as members of the ruling generation, thereby contributing to predictably deleterious public policies with prospectively calamitous outcomes, is that decadence that leads to unstable and potentially oppressive, even tyrannical conditions, which in the end degrade and dissemble the civil society and consume their children’s generation and generations beyond? Reformation and recovery may be possible, but difficult and complicated and typically only after the action of an enormous human toll. Tell me how many people write like this. I’m just saying, Mr. Producer. I’m in a different world, a different mindset when I sit down and write. I just now. Burke’s commentary was motivated by his reflections on the decade long French Revolution, his revulsion at the anarchy and hatred unleashed and in the ensuing more than two centuries and up to this very moment, the world has witnessed much worse. This is not to say that all instances of civil and societal dislocation take the form of bloody revolution or civil war. Obviously, there are varying pathologies peculiar to particular doctrines, cultures, governing systems and so on. There are also differing events and circumstances, some building over time and others descending more abruptly. They contribute to the character of the discontinuity. But violence is the ultimate exposure. Violence is the ultimate exposure. When an economy collapses, you add a little a little taste of it during the pandemic. The culture, the society follow. I can’t think of a single instance where that wasn’t the case even. Even in our country. The Great Depression. Our country changed forever. And for the worse. Before Burke, Charles demands to skewer French philosopher whose life predated the American Revolution, but who was hugely influential on the Constitution’s framers. He also wrote of the disastrous aftermath of the civil societies abandonment, he explained. When that virtue ceases, this is important, folks. When that virtue ceases, ambition enters those hearts. They can admit it and avarice enters them, or desires change their objects that which one used to love one loves no longer. One was free under the laws, one wants to be free against them. Each citizen is like a slave who has escaped from his master’s house. What was a maximum is now called severity. What was a rule is now called constraint. What was vigilance is now called fear. Their frugality, not the desire to possess, is avarice. Formerly, the goods of individuals made up the public treasury. The public Treasury has now become the patrimony of individuals. The Republic is a cast off husk and its strength is no more than the power of few citizens and the license of all. This was written in the 1600s. In modern America, the unraveling of the civil society had been subtly persistent, but is now intensifying. Evidence of rising utopian statism, the allure of political demagogues and self-appointed masterminds peddling abstractions and fantasies in pursuit of a nonexistent paradisiacal society, and the concomitant accretion of governmental power in an increasingly authoritarian and centralized federal leviathan abounds. The ruling generation’s governing policies are already forecast to diminish the quality of life of future generations. Among other things, witness the massive welfare and entitlement state, which is currently expanding and imploding, and the brazen abandonment of constitutional firewalls and governing limitations, if not appropriately and expeditiously ameliorated. The effects will be dire. And the ruling generation knows it. That is, we know it. But we don’t give a damn. We won’t be around. What about our kids? Which takes us back to the beginning. What I read to you. What about our kids? Don’t we care about them? Our kids, our grandkids? Maybe the next generation after that. We can’t be certain. It’s not science. What are we doing to them? What’s going to happen to them now? I wrote this in 2015. I wrote this nine years ago. And I. Dedicated the book to my beloved family, fellow countrymen and future generations. What do you think’s going to happen 25 years ago when I’m gone and people read this book about what’s happening in the country? So we come full circle here to this Bloomberg report. No matter how they ran their computer model and they ran it over and over and over and over again, indeed, they ran it a million simulations. It found that what we are doing to ourselves is unsustainable. And so the the mantra that they’re going to shut down the government will look awfully quaint and stupid when the entire economy collapses because we didn’t shut down the government. I’ll be right back.
Segment 2
I’ve told you now for months and months and months, maybe years, even about the likes of Jake Tapper. You see. As we’ve discussed here many times. As Norman Podhoretz wrote in a very brilliant book, as my wife has told me for the longest amount of time. For Democrats. For hardcore Democrats, the party is their religion, even for, as an example, ethnic Jews or ethnic anybody. It’s the Democrat Party. It’s that philosophy that’s been ingrained in them. Their parents were Democrats, their grandparents. It’s reinforced in elementary school, middle school, high school colleges and universities for sure, and through the media. And this is Jake Tapper’s defect. And he’s not the only one to have this kind of a mental defect. And why am I focused on him when we come back? Because this segment is over. I’ll explain why. I’ll be right back.
Segment 3
I want to remind you, there’s supposed to be distinction between a journalist, so-called news reporter, and people who just give their opinions. But as we know, that’s sort of a quaint memory of times past, because that doesn’t exist anymore. Jake TAPPER is out of the closet in many ways. He’s out of the closet as a Biden pompom boy. He’s out of the closet as a supporter. Of Hamas, and he has been for a long time now. Does it mean he likes what they did on October 7th? But his propaganda is consistent, as is Dana Bash. Another individual who believes the Democrat Party in its ideology is her God. And there are many who do of various faiths and beliefs. But here’s Jake TAPPER on CNN today. Hat tip NewsBusters urging the Wisconsin Democrat Party chairman, Ben Wikler, to make sure the pro-Hamas voters in the state turn out for Biden in November. Cut 19. Go. Let me posit another theory. Maybe those 46,000 people, because they are super engaged, they would turn out and vote. Basically a protest vote, even though President Biden is going to be the nominee. They didn’t need to do that. But they’re motivated and they’re engaged, as you say. Let’s say they go and they vote for Jill Stein or Cornel West or Robert Kennedy Jr. I take your point. They’re not going to vote for Trump. But I if I were you and I’m sure you’re a very smart guy and well respected, I’m sure privately you agree with me, at least these 46,000 are not necessarily going to vote for for Joe Biden. No, no, no. Stop listening and notice the passion. Hey, hey, man, these 46,000, they may go third party. They they’re not going to necessarily vote for Biden. What are you going to do about it? Well, you know. Here are these 46,000. Well, some of them are fantastic people and some of them are the river to the sea crowd. How do we know that? Because they tell us that. They chant it, their imams chant it. I guess we’re supposed to play Helen Keller. I don’t play Helen Keller. I prefer Thomas Paine and Paul Revere. Go ahead. Oh, no one think anyone’s necessarily voting for anyone. I don’t think any candidate should take any voter for granted. So there’s absolutely work to do to show voters that their voices are being heard and most importantly, address the wrenching humanitarian crisis that’s playing out before our eyes on CNN and everywhere else. Si, si, si, si. Ladies and gentlemen. The Democrats believe that their only hope is if Israel loses because the river to the sea crowd. Want to extinguish the state of Israel and the people who live there. And the Democrat Party will sell its proverbial soul for 10,000 votes. And they’re telling you that and they’re being urged to do that by the likes of fake Jake TAPPER. TAPPER. And when they have a representative of the Israeli government. Bet Benjamin Netanyahu himself. Or even somebody who’s not necessarily in the Likud Party who’s on CNN, they trash them. They interrupt them. They berate them. Because they’re all in the end. Pro Joe Biden, pro-Democrat party, anti-American and anti-Israel. That’s what they are. It’s a big country, America. We have over 330 million people. Many of us are actually here as legal citizens. And CNN reaches almost nobody when you consider it. In fact, cable, as a rule, reaches almost nobody as a percentage of the population. Almost nobody’s watching network news anymore. Just nobody’s watching Sunday shows anymore. The biggest audiences are right here. Talk radio and podcasting. That’s the biggest audience. The problem is repetition. Some people hear it, they repeat it, they repeat it. It’s like whisper down the lane. That’s the problem. But the media are really horrific. Give me another example. You have this lawsuit, this rogue, this thug, Jack Smith. Jack Smith has violated rules of professional conduct. He leaks like a sieve. He used a grand jury in Washington, D.C. That should have been a grand jury in Florida for the initial charges against President Trump and the so-called document case. He succeeded in getting a federal judge who was handling two cases, obviously. To destroy Donald Trump’s due process rights. He runs to the appellate court and then he runs to the U.S. Supreme Court demanding that he hold a rushed trial and get to the conviction as fast as possible because he knows what kind of jury he’ll have in Washington. That is an anti-Trump jury, not a jury of Trump’s peers. Fergus, he’s got the whole thing set up. He’s dusted off old laws that actually have nothing to do with January six. Never charge Trump with insurrection, despite the media regurgitating insurrection over and over again. Like it’s the only word they know except when it applies to Biden and the Democrats. Well, he’s got a real judge now in Florida. Not drunken, not these Democrat hack judges in New York. I’ll get to Mershon later. No, no. He’s got a real judge in Florida. And, you know, Judge Aileen Cannon’s a real judge when the media keeps saying she’s appointed by Trump over and over again, appointed by Trump. Now, let’s. Let’s understand that every judge is appointed by somebody. So they’re upset. You say that it’s not a Biden or Obama or Clinton judge. It’s a Trump chuck. Now a Biden, Obama or Clinton judge we can trust like Judge Duncan, are the two knuckleheads on the three judge panel. At the D.C. Circuit Court. Oh, yes. You didn’t keep hearing they were Biden appointees. Two of them. Did you? You didn’t keep hearing chunking as an Obama point, did you? Now. You didn’t. You didn’t hear the demotion Judge who denied Donald Trump his attorney client privilege was an Obama appointed judge. Did you know? But this judge, her middle name is Trump appointed. So there you go. With the meteorite away. So here’s the news from our friends at the Washington Examiner, Caitlin Dees, special counsel Jack Smith tore into the judge presiding over former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case, claiming her proposed jury instructions contained a, quote, flawed legal premise, unquote, worthy of appeal, according to a late filing. Today, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon. Now, you see Smith is writing his briefs also for the legal analysts. At CNN and MSNBC and the New York Times in a Washington compost. The judge had ordered defense lawyers for Trump and prosecutors. To file submissions outlining hypothetical jury instructions. Based on competing interpretations of two laws relevant to the case. Her March 18 order suggests that Trump may have had a legal right under the Presidential Records Act to declare records as personal after leaving office, a premise Smith said was wrong. And we all know that. That Jack Smith is prosecutor, judge and jury. How dare she suggest otherwise? Cannon Even the Washington Examiner, a Trump appointee, ask both parties to write two versions of proposed jury instructions that frame the matters jurors must review before considering a person’s guilt or innocence. So Smith is furious that Cannon is asking for instructions. Their opinions that might involve saying to the jury, you have to decide whether the Presidential Records Act allows a president. To retain records is personal or whether their official records. And what Smith is saying. No, no, no, no, no. I get to decide that. He says the answer is no. They’re not personal records. This is not a matter for a jury. This is what he and the other legal analysts are saying, not a matter for a jury. I. SMITH The government. Hi. The unconstitutionally appointed hack rogue prosecutor who’s doing everything possible to cut corners to undermine the Constitution. I get to decide if the presidential records act simple act apply. It does not. Therefore, that is not something that should be raised in instructions to the jury. The first. Inara asked him to consider whether the government has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that any wreckage Trump was found to have kept at home were personal or presidential. This is why he’s flipping out. Wait a minute. This is a slam dunk case. He took government property. He had no right to guilty. She said, Whoa, whoa, whoa. Wait a minute. That’s not exactly what the Presidential Records Act says. The second told parties to respond to a premise that juries and courts lacked the expertise to review or determine whether a president has sole authority under the Presidential Records Act to categorize records as personal. See, here’s the problem. Jack Smith is bringing what we call cases of first impression, as I’ve explained here before, because nobody’s ever brought cases like this before. Well, nobody’s ever done what Trump has done. That’s a lie. Biden did it. Bill Clinton did it. Hillary Clinton did it. None of them were charged. In one case involving Bill Clinton. When Judicial Watch brought its case in front of a Obama judge in the District of Columbia, the judge all but said that the Presidential Records Act protects Bill Clinton. And notice, nowhere in any single news story do they mention that there’s precedent for this from an Obama judge. Did I say Obama? Obama. Judge? Judge Jackson? Oh, yes. There were two Jacksons on that court, both of which are miserable. But let’s continue. Determine whether the president has sole authority under the Presidential Records Act to categorize records as personal sites, saying these are cases of first impression they have constitutional. Ramifications. So when Jack Smith says or the legal analysts predictably on make LSD in the constipated news network they go on about these instructions are intended to destroy the prosecution’s case. No, the prosecution’s case has to withstand scrutiny right out of the gate. Right out of the gate who says the Presidential Records Act means that a president who believes that this is his property is wrong. Where’s that written? Where’s the precedent for that? There is no precedent for that. Trump’s attorneys leaned into their argument that the former president had control over the designation of documents that he’s accused of illegally retaining. Quote, You heard evidence during the trial that President Trump exercised authority at times verbally and at times without using formal procedures while he was president, Trump’s legal team wrote in its proposed jury instructions. I instruct you that those declassification decisions are examples of valid and legally appropriate uses of President Trump’s declassification authority while he was president of the United States. This is an argument I made months, months, months, months, months ago. First one to do it again. It’s a case of first impression and the right. There’s no requirement under the Constitution. The president is the executive branch. Everything flows from him. He doesn’t need the permission of underlings. He doesn’t need the permission. But the CIA, the FBI, or anybody else, he doesn’t need to put it in writing. He doesn’t need to say to his staff, I am making a declaration that everything I’m taking with me is declassified. I’m making a declaration that everything I’m taking with me is personal. When he does it. The actions. Say the words. Let me go on. And by the way, if that wants to be changed, you’re going to have to amend the Constitution of the United States as applies to the executive branch. Isn’t it amazing, by the way, the Democrats demand Elizabeth Warren at the front of the line. So that tells you what a bunch of kooks they are. The Democrats demand that Biden rule by executive order. Go ahead and Google. It’s all over the rule by executive order. And dammit, if you lose the election, push out executive orders like they’re coming out of all your orifices, push them out fast. So that in other words, the executive branch legislates. No matter what the people say, no matter the mandate, you don’t like Biden, you defeat by they’re saying, do it, do it, do it now. But when it comes to an actual constitutional power the president has, whether or not to declassify and a determination on whether documents or documents of the government or his there, they say, wow, that’s way out of the box. You can’t do that. You can’t do that. So Biden is issuing $1,000,000,000,000 in student loan forgiveness in defiance of the Supreme Court. Not a word. Biden says Biden is violating scores of sections of immigration law. Violating the Constitution’s take care clause. Not a word. Can’t impeach him for that. That’s just a policy decision. Trump and his lawyers argue he took these documents. He had a right to possess them by the act of taking them. He declassified them. Oh, my God. That’s so over the top. So the judge is saying, well, this is a determination we have to make. And I’ll add, we’re not going to listen to the buffoons on CNN and MSNBC. The clown shows the conga line of the morons to make our decisions here. This is a legitimate question that needs to be addressed. I’m going to continue this when I return. I’ll be right back.
Segment 4
Trump is charged with 32 counts of violating the Espionage Act with each count corresponding to a classified document he’s alleged to have retained. So he overcharges the guy. Even if you were going to charge three or four counts. No. 32. That’s this guy’s a diabolical S.O.B.. To have written these documents illegally after leaving the Oval Office. He also faces eight counts related to alleged obstruction of officials efforts to retrieve the materials. That was a complete set up. There never should have been the criminalization of this case ever, ever. And of course, this guy’s angry with the judge. Who’s trying to put justice on the table and not. An IPA effectively a judge for the government like drunken as are these these Democrat elected judges. And in New York she’s actually a referee. And again, a case of first impression that raises constitutional issues. And the prosecutor now cannot get can’t get those instructions. And I’m going to repeat on the media there. Wow, He taught her. What a bunch of dumbass. Just remember, this is the Hamas media who hate your guts. We’ll be right back.