On Thursday’s Mark Levin Show, it appears that everything that could go wrong went wrong in California. Not by nature but the ideologues who run California. We need answers and accountability. Why were they pushing radical, left-wing ideological policies that put people at risk, such as DEI and environmental justice programs? Also, the Supreme Court denied President-Elect Trump’s request to delay the NYC sentencing. Justices John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett joined with the left on the Court. They didn’t issue an opinion; it was an order. So, the lawfare continues. Later, Rep Chip Roy introduced a bill against the ICC and it passed in the House, now it goes to the Senate. The bill is meant to sanction and punish the ICC. We shouldn’t outsource our institutions to foreign governments. Roy calls in to give the specifics of the bill. He also discusses the breaking news that the Supreme Court denied Trump’s stay request. Finally, Eli Beer, President of the U.S.-based organization Friends of United Hatzalah, calls in to discuss his organization. They’re a group of volunteers and their main goal is to get to every emergency in Israel within minutes.
AFPI
Brief and Support of President Trump’s Appeal to the Supreme Court
Newsmax
US Believes Only 20 Hostages Still Alive in Gaza
Washington Post
Supreme Court refuses to delay Trump’s hush money sentencing
Breitbart
Breitbart Editor Tries to Save House in Palisades Fire
Photo by Eric Thayer
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. Almost looks like an atomic bomb blew up in and around Los Angeles. The devastation is. I’m certain that more than five people have died from fires like this in different locations. The intensity of it, the speed of the move of the fires with the wind. And it also appears that everything that could go wrong went wrong. Everything that could go wrong went wrong. And by that I don’t mean nature. I mean by the incompetence by the ideologues who run the water system, who oversee the budgets for the fire departments, and on and on. It all came to a head and the consequences are just unbelievable. And I’m sick and tired of the media and the left telling us that we shouldn’t hold people to account. Now what do you mean by that, Mark? They keep calling it politicization, that this is being politicized. No, it’s not. When Donald Trump and others me behind this microphone demand to know exactly who did what, what it was based on. We want to understand why they keep pushing these radical ideologies that put people at risk and their homes at risk and animals at risk. We need answers. We need answers. You cannot have devastation like this and not get answers and not have accountability. You have a governor. The governor is in charge. DeSantis was in charge of Florida during the hurricanes. He gets an A triple plus. This guy Newsom is a disaster. And he’s not the only one. He’s not the only one. These crazy, radical phony environmental policies, these degrowth attacks on the infrastructure, on the infrastructure, on our energy, on water availability. This needs to be addressed because they want to take this, this act nationwide. That’s what they want to do. Now I’ve spent a lot of today doing research, looking online at various studies and so forth, so you don’t have to. And I notice, I was using Google that all these left wings programs, DEI programs, equity programs, environmental justice programs, environmental reparations programs. Every time I was trying to do research, these things just kept popping up scores at a time. Every university is involved in this, in this sham. Every, every university virtually in California, there are programs promoting this ideology. And it’s taken people’s lives, it’s taken their homes. It’s been absolutely horrendous. And we in this country, whether in California or anywhere, we need answers. Now we spend trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars on climate change, so called, on the Green New Deal, so called we’ve got regulators in Washington D.C. doing things that impact towns, cities, communities all over this country in horrendous ways. They don’t represent the people. In fact, I would argue that their activities are unconstitutional. They’re not our representatives. And then we have actual representatives of the people like in California. They keep pointing fingers elsewhere and they have their defenders even now on television. The idea that a fire hydrant doesn’t have water pressure for a situation like this in a place that has wildfires is crazy. With the kind of money that that government in California pulls in and spends. I watched this guy Newsom, he’s a clown. He doesn’t even understand what’s going on. It’s up to the locals when it comes to water. No, it isn’t. It’s not a local issue. The water is not produced locally, doesn’t come from originally from local sites. Water pressure and fire hydrants. Shouldn’t that be like the number one issue? So they’re having to use fire hoses, excuse me, garden hoses. Garden hoses, which aren’t going to put out fires. Now what’s amazing about that is apparently there’s enough water pressure for garden hoses. We all know what’s been going on. We’ve been witness to this. Whether you live in California or anywhere else in the United States. The radical environmental groups and their lawsuits to prevent infrastructure from being formed and built and with and maintained. Um, Washington D.C. and Sacramento with their crazy ass policies when it comes to fish and other things. The battle over water, the water wars they called them in California, well now they have consequences. This isn’t the only thing. Brownouts and blackouts, energy shortages, gasoline shortages, electricity shortages, water shortages, water redistribution in the state of California, which really is more natural resources, certainly a diversity of natural resources than any other state in the country. The largest population of any other state in the country. The biggest budget of any other state in the country. It wasn’t always this way, but it’s this way now. It’s the same ideology that has an open border and has destroyed our immigration system. Destroying our communities with Venezuelan gangs, Salvadoran gangs, other criminals, Fentanyl. That’s man made. That’s not nature. That’s man made. Or the undermining of our police forces and law and order all across the country. They just gave Soros, Biden did the regime presidential Medal of Freedom. Soros in part is responsible for widespread crime that’s taking place in this country. Medal of Freedom says, I don’t really care about the social consequences of My position, and that’s from his days as a teenager in Germany when the Nazis were taking property which he was involved in. He gets a medal of freedom. They’re ultimately going to destroy the car industry. They’re trying to push people into electrical vehicles that they cannot afford, where there aren’t enough stations to charge up. Where the car is, in my view, totally inconvenient, especially if you want to travel out of state or for some kind of distance or something like that. The grid is incapable of handling all of this electrical use. Nobody has a solution for that, nobody’s proposed a solution for that. And yet here we go, wild eyed in a radical ideological agenda that has real consequences. You know, we keep killing the energy industry, we’re not going to have food in this country. What do you think fertilizer is made out of? What do you think tractors use when food’s being harvested? What do you think trucks use in order to get the food to our grocery stores and so forth and so on? The packaging, the plastic, it’s all fuel based. All of it, all of it. Electricity can’t substitute for that. We’re not building nuclear plants, we’re not building anything that will create the kind of energy we need. So people are going to freeze during the winter, you’re going to have heat waves during the summer, and the impact is going to be devastating on life. This is what happens when you follow these ideologues, these radical no growth Marxist ideologues, which has been mainstreamed in the Democrat Party, in the media and academia, has real consequences and we’re not allowed to discuss it. We’re not supposed to discuss it. Well, like hell. You cannot have a disaster like this in the United States of America, in the greatest country on the face of the Earth, because these kooks, these radical kooks have taken over. And ground zero is California. Now here’s a woman who runs into Gavin Newsom in California today, whose life has been devastated. I don’t know what this guy Gavin Newsom does for many years, past years, all he does is he travels to Washington, he goes around the country, wants to be president, does media interviews. The hell. This guy’s totally useless. He’s the Justin Trudeau of California. It’s what he is. A pretty boy who’s got a low iq, who’s lazy, who doesn’t do the hard work. Cut one, go. Soundbite: Governor, you got a second? Governor? Governor, I live here. Governor. That was my daughter’s school. Governor, please tell me what you’re going to do. I’M not going to hurt him. I promise. Gavin Newsom: I’m literally talking to the president right now to specifically answer the question of what we can do for you and your daughter. Speaker B: Can I hear it? Can I hear your call? Because I don’t believe it. Gavin Newsom: Uh, I’m sorry. Can I. There’s literally. I’ve tried five times why I’m walking around to make. Speaker B: Why is the president not taking your call? Gavin Newsom: Because it’s not going through, so I have to get cell service. Speaker B: Let’s get it. Let’s get it. I want to be here when you call the president. Gavin Newsom: I appreciate it. I’m doing that right now. And it’s to immediately get reimbursements, individual assistance, and to help government. Devastating. I’m so sorry. Especially for your daughter. I have four kids losing everyone who. Speaker B: Went to school there. They lost their homes. They lost two homes because they were living in one building, another. Governor, please tell me, tell me, what are you gonna do with the president right now? Gavin Newsom: We’re getting the resources to help rebuild. Speaker B: We’re getting the. Why was there no water in the hydrants? Gavin Newsom: Governor, it’s, uh, all literally. Speaker B: Is it gonna be different next time? Gavin Newsom: It has to be. Has to be. Of course. Speaker B: What are you gonna do if you fill the hydrants? I would fill them up personally. You know that. Gavin Newsom: I literally have. Speaker B: I would fill up the hydrants myself. Gavin Newsom: I wouldn’t. Speaker B: I understand, but would you do that? Gavin Newsom: I would do whatever I can. Speaker B: But you’re not. I see the. Do you know there’s water dripping over there? Governor, there’s water coming out there. You can use it. Gavin Newsom: I’m going to make the call to address everything I can right now, including making sure people. Speaker B: I’d like to make sure you can I have an opportunity to at least tell people you’re doing what you’re saying you’re doing. Could somebody have a contact. Can I have your contact information? Mark Levin: Mm. Uh-huh. Boy, she was good. Because she’s desperate and she doesn’t believe him. The man’s had years to address these issues. Years. I hope you’ll watch my Saturday life. Liberty and Levin. Sunday, too. I address this. I hope you’ll watch the blaze. I address this, too. He’s a liar. He’s talked about cleaning up these forest floors to an extent he never did 20, 21 and they caught him. An NPR of all of all media platforms reported on it. He doesn’t do the things he says he’s doing. He doesn’t do it. And, you know, sadly, it’s Left to the firefighters to explain what’s going on and why they can’t do certain things. You had firefighters. There was no water coming through these hydrants. No water coming through these hydrants. This is a state that has wildfires. That has wildfires. But you have politicians, you have, uh, bureaucrats, you have phony experts, you have environmental groups that own the damn state. The people are basically imprisoned in this, in this mire. They’re imprisoned in this mire. They pay massive property taxes, massive income taxes, massive sale taxes. The price of everything’s through the roof because they cater to these unions and you expect the state to at least to do the basics right? But they don’t because they’re too busy. They’re too busy redistributing wealth, catering to illegal aliens, excuse me, rejiggering society. They have their ideas of what people should do and what a state should look like. And if you get in the way, they just bulldoze over you. We don’t have time to clean the forests. What, for the lumberjacks? We’re not going to do that. The lumberjacks are the patriots. The lumber companies are the patriots. It’s really sad. I’ll be right back.
Segment 2
What is the situation with the water? Obviously, and, uh, I’ll say you ran. Gavin Newsom: Out last night in the hydrants. I was trying the firefighter on this block. They left because there was no water. (Soundbite) Gavin Newsom: In the hydrant here. The local folks are trying to figure that out. I mean, just when you have a system that is not dissimilar to what we’ve seen in other extraordinarily large scale fires, whether it be pipe electricity or whether it just be the complete overwhelm of the system. I mean, those hydrants are typical for two or three fires, maybe one fire, you have something at this scale. But again, that’s going to be determined by the local. Mark Levin: I mean, that’s a complete duck. That’s a complete duck. Okay, so you know that going in. So what have you done about it? Absolutely nothing. Absolutely nothing. Haven’t done anything about it. And as I said, there’s, uh, NPR, but it wasn’t just NPR. Use NPR because it’s, it’s a left wing government run platform about how he’s lied about what they’ve done with the forests. He’s just lied about it. And the New York Post has an excellent story and there are others too, about how corruption has really seeped into the whole water issue there. It’s not just that. It’s the radical Environmental groups that are trying to withhold water from what the farmers. And so they fight water, they fight efforts to get more water into the state. And this has consequences. You know, we have to hold people to account. We have to hold ideologies to account. We can’t let this go on and on. The people are suffering there, but there’s going to be more suffering. The reporting has been superb. The reporting is superb, but the reporting is on the end results of what take place when this passes. So be as we say, when it passes. Are they going to go back and do stories on how this happened? Are they going to go back and tell us why the hydrants didn’t work, what happened with the water, what happened with the reservoirs, the litigation by the radical left wing, so called environmental groups, the policies that have taken place as a result of the governor and the legislature. Are they going to go into this? Are we going to just keep hearing about climate change and the Green New Deal and uh, all the rest, the uh, language that’s thrown out there to confuse people? Oh, it’s the climate change. No, it’s not. It’s nature. And nature can be brutal. Nature kills, obviously not all the time, but nature kills. We’ll be right back.
Segment 3
Los Angeles is drained of water, as the New York Post put it correctly. Several wildfires, fires burned through LA on Wednesday, spurring mandatory evacuations, as we know. But they have, they have, uh, left the city drained of water. These policies are a disgrace. We need to talk about these policies. We need to talk about this ideology. Ideology does not replace reality, does not replace common sense and experience. And we are basing so much what we do in our country when it comes to our well being, our standard of living, our automobiles, heating and cooling, our homes, electricity, fuel of every kind. On ideology, on ideology. And this needs to be fought and we need to expose who and what’s behind it or there’s going to be more of this and people die from this. Here’s President Trump on Capitol Hill yesterday. Cut four, go. Soundbite: Mr. President, during the pandemic you often said that you didn’t believe that you should bail out loose states that you knew for being mismanaged. Given your criticism of Governor Gavin Newsom, are you willing to work with him? And do you believe that federal aid should be provided to California for as long as it takes? Donald Trump: Well, it’s very sad because I’ve been trying to get Gavin Newsom to allow water to come. You’d have tremendous water up there. They send it out to the Pacific because they’re trying to protect a tiny. Mark Levin: Let’s stop right there. Everything he’s saying is correct. They’re flowing water out to the Pacific. That’s what they’re doing. And they are. They’re putting this, this. It’s not a snail darter, but some, some fish. Barely a fish ahead of humankind. Go ahead. Donald Trump: Is in other areas, by the way, called the smelt. And for the sake of a smelt, they have no water. They had no water in the fire hydrants today in Los Angeles. It was a terrible thing. And we’re going to get that done. It’s going to finally be done. I got it done from the federal side and, uh, he didn’t want to sign it, but it’s not going to happen again like that. Mark Levin: This is what people want to hear. This is a. This is a can do leader said, we’re not going to do this again. We’re going to do what I say we’re going to do and we’re going to put an end to this. And, um, that’s what’s going to happen. You know, it’s him. You got guys like Elon Musk and others. This is the way they operate. This is the way they think. That’s why they’re successful. What has Gavin Newsom ever done? Nothing. Or any of these people who are involved in making all these decisions, or at the national level, Bernie Sanders or a, uh, Joe Biden. They think their virtue signaling somehow replaces the ability to get these important things done. Well, I can’t spend three hours on this. I suppose I could, but there are other things going on in this country. There’s other things going on elsewhere. The President Trump, his lawyers have filed with the Supreme Court, something I’ve been encouraging now for month after month after month after month. They’ve. They have filed a request, an emergency appeal, they called it, with the Supreme Court. That’s perfectly fine. It’s actually quite good. They made an argument I would not have made, but it’s okay. They made an argument anyway that may or may not work, which is stay Merchan tomorrow. Do not allow him the sentence we’re appealing through the appellate courts of New York. We need to resolve this issue of immunity and these other issues in front of these courts, uh, before Merchan can actually sentence. Now, of course, what my argument would have been is, uh, dismiss this case. It should never been handled based on the Supremacy Clause jurisdictional issues. And other issues. I mean, as I’ve been saying now for a long time, but that’s the way it is. And I was glad to see there was a friend of the court in amicus brief that was filed by former Attorney General Edwin Meese and Professor Stephen Calabresi. Now, as you know, Ed Mies is a mentor of mine and Stephen Calabrese, he’s an old colleague and a buddy of mine. He’s a, he’s a brilliant professor. And, um, among others, the America, uh, First Policy Institute, Fort Worth, Texas was involved. And Council of record, they have some great lawyers here, like Ken Klikowski and um, Christopher Bartimucci and others. And, uh, this was filed as well. So you have the defense, they’re filing, or I should call at this point, the petitioner, um, you have this amicus brief. Now, it’s interesting is they did say to, um, Bragg’s office that you need to file response. What’s your answer to this? Which means, I hope that they’re taking it seriously. Now, they’re either going to make, they’re either going to make a decision tonight or tomorrow morning because Marshan has scheduled his sentencing. Um, that is the sentencing of President Trump for tomorrow in the morning. So it either comes tonight or it comes tomorrow morning. Whatever comes. I don’t like the idea that they gave the Supreme Court such little time, that is the lawyers, but they did and here’s where we are. So let’s hope for the best. Now, as I went through the filings by the defense and I went through the filings by, by the, uh, amici. The amicus, uh, filing, they essentially cover the arguments that I’ve been making on TV and radio and elsewhere, as publicly as I know how, as well as in writing. And that is, among other things, they say under long standing department precedent of the Department of Justice, the Constitution does not permit the prosecution of a sitting president. They said this prohibition extends to the unusual circumstances of a prosecution of a sitting president that’s being held in abeyance or on appeal. What they’re saying there is the fact that this appellate process will take place during the course of the Trump presidency means that this criminal prosecution is going on during the course of the Trump presidency. And they’re right about that. The department recently concluded that holding a prosecution in abeyance would still be unconstitutional. That is waiting until after the president serves, the Department of Justice took the position that it’s unacceptable. Now, of course, what I would have said here is just, I’m not second guessing I’m just telling you my audience. Under long standing department precedent, the Constitution does not permit the prosecution of a sitting president. What I would have said is the state prosecutor and state judge can’t do what a federal prosecutor and a federal judge cannot do. In fact, there’s more reason to argue that they can’t do it than the feds. Given the number of district attorneys and state judges there are, you can imagine what havoc would be unleashed on the federal constitutional system. And then from there, I would have argued the Supremacy Clause and jurisdiction and all those issues. They say even if the Constitution does not require dismissal here, prudence counsels in favor of dismissing the case in the national interest. No question about that. And so that point is in fact made in this amicus brief. They say although states have a legitimate interest in criminal prosecutions, there’s also a compelling national interest in a president being able to devote his full attention to his duties. That is the position of the United States Department of Justice. They say New York’s interest is dwarfed by the interests of the United States as a whole. Any president who’s not distracted by an ongoing prosecution, again, that comes right from the Department of Justice. It’s a very important argument. A very important argument. But to me, the biggest of all the arguments is, what are we doing here? They have no jurisdiction whatsoever. None. None. And they’re interfering with a federal election. They did. A federal officer, the President of the United States, the only one elected nationally, he and the vice and so forth and so on. On these arguments that I’ve made. In any event, it is in front of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court will decide, and I hope the Supreme Court does two things. Number one, takes the case, issues the stay, and then number two says, look, it’s a bit of an internal contradiction to say that, you know, you have the right to go through the appellate process in New York, when in fact, the purpose of the appellate process in New York is to adjudicate federal, constitutional and other federal matters. And so we hold as a matter of federal constitutional law that this case is dead. Now, that would take some cojones, but so be it. That’s the right decision, in my humble opinion. Whether it was presented that way or not is beside the point. That was the right decision. So we’ll see. I am here. I will be here for, oh, another two hours and 15 minutes. If the court should do something, they do something in the morning. You’ll want to tune in tomorrow evening, I’m sure, and we will discuss this at, uh, length like nobody else can. Now, here’s what’s interesting to me, Mr. Producer and America. They went to the Supreme Court. The president’s lawyers, the legal analysts on television, the former federal prosecutors, the defense counsel, the professor’s name, what, whomever. They all said, don’t go to the Supreme Court because the court may not take it. Stick with the, the state appellate process, finish that process, then maybe go to the Supreme Court. I said, what are you talking about? You kind of destroy the whole purpose of going to the Supreme Court, which is the illegitimacy of this process. And yet you are voluntarily submitting yourself to the process. You kind of undermine your arguments. It’s internally contradictory. Just go to the Supreme Court and fight to get this thing removed on the, on the various grounds that I’ve argued. But they went to the Supreme Court when? Before the sentencing was handed down. So in effect, they went to the Supreme Court before there was a final decision, despite the fact the former federal prosecutors and others have been saying all over cable TV and elsewhere, you have to wait for the appellate state process to be completed before you can try to go to the Supreme Court. It’s never been the case. It’s not true, as I’ve been trying to say over and over and over again, not trying, have been saying, trying to convince people. And so, in fact, this filing with the Supreme Court underscores my point that you do not have to wait. The court could say, we’re not going to take it, but you do not have to wait to file under circumstances like this, which are very, very unique and very crucial. So they’re not waiting for the sentencing decision. They’re not waiting for the appellate courts in New York to make their decision. They went to the Supreme Court now, as they should, but it’s a very tight window and I hope, I hope the court doesn’t feel like they’re holding a gun to their head because, um, again, to me, this is something that should have been done months ago. Again, I’m not attacking. These lawyers have been superb. They’ve won everything. But this one is particularly difficult and complicated. And that’s where I excel. It’s just the way I am with these particularly difficult and complicated cases. I’ll be right back.
Segment 4
I’m going to have our friend Chip Roy on the program a little bit after the, uh, top of the hour. Next hour. He introduced a bill. He led the effort along with Brian Mast and a handful of others, against the International Criminal Court. The International Criminal Court is a radical left wing court, much like the UN Globalist court, um, that basically is appointed by and is filled with Europeans. We have rejected it. We do not accept jurisdiction. The Israelis have rejected it. They do not accept jurisdiction. We have our own sovereign government, our own sovereign constitution. We live by our rules. Our representatives are supposed to represent us in the context of our constitution and our rules, not foreign judges appointed by leftists and as it turns out, Israeli hating Jew haters. Now, this court has been itching, itching to try and have the jurisdiction to hold our soldiers, our admirals, our generals, our president responsible for allegations that are made by other governments, and Donald Trump long before him. Others have said, no, we’re not going to do that. We have our own system. We certainly are not going to have our soldiers subject to that, our president subject to that. It’s not going to happen. And we saw why. Because a corrupt prosecutor with the ICC, without any facts of any serious kind, with filings by South Africa, which is that government there, is Marxist and highly anti Semitic. Ireland and others, Iran funding it. They filed a complaint with this court. The prosecutor took the complaint. Basically, the prosecutor who has his own problems with molesting women. That’s the allegation. His brother went to jail because he’s a pedophile, so that you got a whole sick thing going on here. And he goes after Netanyahu. And so in the end, this court issues an arrest warrant for Netanyahu to be brought before the court. So the Republicans in the House have led the way. Chip Roy, Brian Mast and a handful of others. And in the House, they passed a bill with bipartisan support. It’ll go to the Senate to punish and to sanction this court more when I return.