August 25th, 2022

On Thursday’s Mark Levin Show, when you are President of the United States and you leave the White House for the final time, the very act of taking classified or non-classified documents before you leave the White House is a Presidential act. If an ex-President has classified documents, he didn’t acquire them as an ex-President. A President can classify and declassify at will and doesn’t need to follow any protocol – he is the executive branch. The question remains, was this FBI raid about January 6 and broader issues? Also, did you ever think you would see the day when teachers in Virginia are trained to transition children’s genders without parental approval? To figure out what’s going on we have to go back to Marx and Engels who argued that you had to destroy the family unit, and binary sex in order to establish a Marxist society. Then, California continues to destroy itself as they move toward banning new cars running only on gas by 2035. California has the highest income rates in the country, the health care system is a disaster because of the influx of illegal immigrants in the state, and businesses are fleeing. California is turning into Venezuela. Finally, Gov Ron DeSantis calls in to discuss the DeSantis education agenda. 25 out of the 30 DeSantis endorsed candidates won on Tuesday running on this agenda. DeSantis’s opponent Charlie Crist is insulting the voters of Florida and California Governor Newsom is getting involved in the Florida Governors race.

Twitter
Mark Zuckerberg tells Joe Rogan that Facebook algorithmically censored the Hunter Biden laptop story for 7 days based on a general request from the FBI to restrict election misinformation.

The Hill
Biden says ‘extreme MAGA philosophy’ is like ‘semi-fascism’

Fox News
Newsom wants to ‘make DeSantis a one-term Governor’ pledges $100,000 to Crist’s campaign

Washington Post
California moves toward banning new cars running only on gas by 2035

Photo by Alex Wong

The podcast for this show can be streamed or downloaded from the Audio Rewind page.

Rough transcript of Hour 1

Hour 1 Segment 1

With all this swirling around different legal analysts out there, let me see if I can make some sense and bring you some context of what’s taking place. The key here first is the Presidential Records Act. Passed in 1978, it’s been amended since. Prior to that, presidents could own the documents, the property that they had and so forth. Now, you know, when this first was revealed two and a half weeks ago, the search warrant, everybody was talking about the Espionage Act. And then there was a leak to The New York Times, Maggie Haberman and her. Cohort’s. That the president had 300 classified documents. Then the argument was, well. Declassify, classify them Trump people said he had a standing order. On classifying them. People said, no, we don’t buy that. We don’t buy that he had to fill out something, he had to do something, didn’t he? Didn’t he? No. So she came up in May 15, 20, 17. PolitiFact is a left wing, unreliable operation, but nonetheless. Nonetheless, unreliable if you’re a conservative, reliable if you’re a leftist. In other words, in my view. They’re very, very partisan, so when they come to the conclusion that a president has a right to classify or declassify. That’s a big issue. They refer to a blockbuster article in The Washington Post, twenty seventeen, saying President Trump had revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister, an ambassador in a White House meeting. Didn’t just put the White House on the defense, it also put Republican lawmakers on the defense. They write one of the members of Congress who commented after the newspaper’s revelations was Senator Risch, Republican Idaho. According to CNN, he told reporters the minute the president actually me, the minute the president speaks about it to someone, he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process. Is that accurate, independent experts said Riesch is on target concerning the legal powers of the president. Some experts added, however, the senator’s formulation left out some context that is relevant. Experts agreed. The president, as commander in chief, is ultimately responsible for classification and declassification when people lower in the chain of command handle classified and declassified duties, which is usually how it’s done, because they have been delegated to do so by the president directly or by an appointee chosen by the president. The majority ruling in the 1988 Supreme Court case, Department of Navy versus Zygon. Which address the legal recourse of a Navy employee who had been denied a security clearance addresses this line of authority. Quote. The president, after all, is the commander in chief of the Army, Navy and the United States, according to the article two of the Constitution, wrote the court’s majority, his authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the president and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant. Stephen Atwood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, said that such authority gives the president the authority to classify, declassify will something I’ve been arguing. In fact, Robert Turner, associate director, University of Virginia Center for National Security Law, said if Congress were to enact a statute seeking to limit the president’s authority to classify or declassify national security information or to prohibit him from sharing certain kinds of information with Russia, it would raise serious separation of powers, constitutional issues. In other words, the president cannot be covered by the Espionage Act of 1917. I’ll get to the ex-president issue in a minute. The official documents governing classification and declassification stem from executive orders, but even these executive orders aren’t necessarily binding on the president. The president is not obliged to follow any procedures other than those that he himself has prescribed, Aftergood said. And he can change them. Indeed, the controlling executive order has been rewritten by multiple presidents, the current version of the order by Obama in 2009 one was written by. George W. Bush one was written by Ronald Reagan. The national security experts at the blog Lawfare wrote in the wake of this revelation, that infamous comment by Richard Nixon, that when the president does it, that means it’s not illegal. It’s actually true about some things. Classified information is one of them. The nature of the system is that the president gets to disclose what he wants. But they say there’s two caveats. Some experts said Russia’s. Formulation leaves out some notable aspects of the particular case involving Trump, the first caveat. While Trump has the power to declassify information, he doesn’t appear to have done that in this case, at least at the time of the story broke. There’s no question the president has broad authority. So that goes to the question again of whether whether there needs to be some kind of writing. There simply does not. So that caveat doesn’t even matter. And so this is brought out primarily by me on my Fox show and in this radio program. So now they’ve moved from that, right? But an ex-president. Well, when you’re president of the United States and you’re going to leave the White House. Because Biden’s going to come in and take over the Oval Office. The very act of you taking the documents. Before you leave the White House. Is a presidential act, this is what I keep trying to explain, I can’t seem to get it through the people or they don’t want to believe it because they’re former federal prosecutors and they want to be able to prosecute. Now, this piece was written. Over five years ago. But it still applies. So the president has classified information. Did he acquire that information as an ex-president? No, he acquired it as president. OK. President and ex-president. Now we look at the Presidential Records Act, which people are only looking at because of the piece that was in The Wall Street Journal written by two. Very serious, highly practiced and competent constitutional lawyers. And I find this again, not from a a friend of Trump’s, it’s from March twenty nineteen Sara Worth. Presidential Records Act has been seldom litigated. But courts have decided that the law allows for only narrow judicial review. Of a president’s record keeping practices. And Armstrong versus Bush, the D.C. Circuit, the appellate court under the Supreme Court. And that review of a president’s preservation guidelines was unavailable under the Administrative Procedures Act because the president is not an executive agency. He is the executive branch. And Armstrong versus executive office of the President D.C. Circuit held the courts may review guidelines outlining what is and what is not a presidential record under the terms, but in terms of the president’s handling of it, his practices, no. Based on those rulings, the D.C. District Court. In the case of Cruz versus Trump, reason that mandamus relief, the court order is available only under extraordinary circumstances in the president’s record keeping duties under the Presidential Records Act or to discretionary to be enforced by court order. In short, the court found that judges may review the classification of existing records, but a court may not direct the president to affirmatively create and preserve particular records. Under the PRA to affirmatively create or preserve particular records. All this talk about will Trump, you know, used to destroy records at the White House and lawyers right around taping them together, they didn’t need to run around taping them together. So the way to think about this is the president is the executive branch. They keep explaining a regulation or statute or. Subordinates creating checklists and so are of no consequence. Now, you need to keep something in mind, the Presidential Records Act contemplates a process, a process over a period of years, a period of time. Period of years and a period of time. Donald Trump as president and his administration created more than 27 boxes of materials, right, Mr. Producer? Tens of millions of pages. Emails. Other information. That the archives has. Tens of millions of pages. I’m the first one to reveal this, and yet it’s common sense, it’s simple. For years, he produced tens of millions of pages, not just Trump, but his administration. Where are they? There were the National Archives. There with the National Archives. And so these boxes are taken tomorrow, laga. We don’t even know if he knows. At the front end, what’s in these boxes, but it doesn’t matter. Remember, he’s the president at the time, these boxes. If he decides to take them. Quote unquote, declassify them, the dirty classified. Period. This is a process that is supposed to take years, these negotiations go on for years. Donald Trump in February of this year was out of office for approximately 12 months. One year. And they are negotiating maybe the negotiations aren’t going as well as the Biden archives, the Biden council. The Biden Department of Justice. The Biden U.S. attorney would like. But the negotiations are going on. We know that for a fact right into June, we know there was a subpoena. We know there was at least one visit, I think two visits tomorrow, Laga. No indication of anything untoward except that the National Archives, one of the documents. Now, what’s interesting about the Presidential Records Act. Is that. It actually protects the ex-president. From the Freedom of Information Act, a pretext for a period of a number of years, it protects the ex-president. In some cases, for a period up to 12 years, it even contemplates and provides. That even if the existing administration wants documents, certain documents, it has to go through procedures to gain access to those documents within the multi-year period in which the president, the ex-president himself or any of his delegates. Have sole access to the. So it’s not about the Espionage Act. It’s not about stealing government property when there’s a negotiation process. It’s not about obstruction. The government pulled the trigger. On a secret search warrant as fast as it could. And grabbed everything in sight. Why? Well, we’re told by the legal analysts, the former federal prosecutors, this is about. Possession. Possession, it’s clear I see it all over the site, lawfare and so forth. That the government the second the president leaves office, the government gets the documents. The second the president leaves office, the government gets the documents. Is it a crime, by the way? If it doesn’t get the documents within a second. Keep that question, we’ll be right back.

Hour 1 Segment 2

One other thing on this Espionage Act of 1917. It’s never been used to prosecute a sitting president, of course, but it’s never been used to prosecute. He former president. And former presidents were free to take home documents, including classified documents. Prior to 1978, actually prior 1974. So the vast majority of Prez’s, almost all of them in our history, would take home documents and keep them. There was no distinction between classified and unclassified. So my point to you is. They didn’t pass this law for the purpose of trying to figure out how to criminalize, since 1974, an act of a president taking classified documents. The law was passed in 1917. The Espionage Act has no application to a president or a former president, but more when I return.

Hour 1 Segment 3

Let me summarize it this way. I heard much about my buddy Andy McCarthy said on Brett Bear’s show on Fox during the break. And I have some disagreements with them, first of all, there’s a moving ball here, the Espionage Act. I just told you, the D.C. Circuit Court, among others, have made clear. We just. The president can classified, declassify will any day not follow any protocol, Article two, Section one, first sentence. He is the executive branch. He’s also the sole commander in chief. He’s even able to destroy those records or share them with anyone, the latter of which then presumes declassification. That says president, again, it’s extremely broad as a president must have the ability to function without the criminalization of his duties. Second, Trump was out of office for a mere 12 months. When the issues arose about these particular box, it may have been earlier. Multimillions of pages of Trump administration documents or with the archives, so these documents likely in and around his office, etc., went to Mar a Lago that was president when he made the decision to remove them to Mar a Lago, if in fact he did and not the GSA. That would remove any application of the Espionage Act, period. I understand former prosecutors now look at it this way, but they’re wrong. The law was never intended to apply to a sitting or former president. Now, remember, the Espionage Act is much, much broader than just the handling of classified documents. It deals with information which, of course, the former president retains in his head. Now, his subordinates have no constitutional protection. Third, the Presidential Records Act has no sanctions in it, let alone criminal sanctions. Negotiating over documents, what is or is not personal or whatever. It certainly does not show an intent to commit any crime. So. When people talk about possession. That they were supposed to go to the archives and there at Mark Mar a Lago. The second after the president leaves office. OK, so what? That isn’t grounds to get a search warrant. Fought the warrant was extremely broad, in my view, it violates the Fourth Amendment against general warrants. Why was it so broad? FBI had been there twice before they had video. FBI had free run of the place and a previous subpoena. Well, if it is, as I surmise, and others have now a pretext to look for more documents related to January six. Then this whole thing is a ruse. Then this whole thing is a ruse. But you have to ask yourself, given everything I’ve just told you. Why would the attorney general of the United States, why would the U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C., Graves’, why would the Biden administration take what is really a relatively innocuous matter? That’s being negotiated, being discussed, it’s not as if anything’s being. You know, I suddenly found out that there were documents that Mar a Lago. Why all the drama? Why all the activity? Why all the urgency, so I have surmised maybe somebody is claiming that somebody destroyed a document or something. OK, but then why would the attorney general wait weeks to decide to issue or to seek the issuance of a search warrant? Why? And why, when they get that approval from a master, everybody keeps calling this guy a judge from a master. On a Friday, would they wait until a Monday? But they’re all taking a break over the weekend. Why? And notice the focus on the leaks coming out of the very people who are demanding that. The affidavit be secreted. It’s on the classification of documents. And notice how swiftly it has now changed. To the retention of documents. The retention of documents. So they’ll now say the Espionage Act. Can still be violated? No, it can’t. While he stole the documents. Let’s say, ladies and gentlemen, you steal jewelry from a jewelry store, do you start negotiating with the owner, the jewelry store, over the jewelry, Mr.. He didn’t steal anything. He didn’t steal anything. So the question remains. Was this about January six and broader issues and this other stuff is being leaked in order to. Change the subject. Now, that’s not to say that they wouldn’t necessarily bring an indictment based on some of this because they know they’re going to have a friendly friendly. Jury, as they do a friendly grand jury. They know they’re going to have a friendly judge as they do a friendly Mr.. But I just want you, most of you nonlawyers, most of you looking at this and shaking your head to understand. This is perverse what’s taking place here over these documents. It’s really quite outrageous. Want to read something else to you from Politico? Back several years ago, twenty, fourteen. Eight, to be accurate, President Barack Obama signs presidential records reforms. Well, what’s this? President Obama signed a bill that has the potential to curtail prolonged delays in the release of historical White House records. White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest, who was anything but announced that the Presidential and Federal Records Act amendments of 2014 was among a set of bills Obama approved just prior to the Thanksgiving holiday. The legislation will end the practice of White House lawyers repeatedly extending the review of records of prior presidents that the National Archives has designated for release under the new law. The current president and affected former president have 60 business days to review records. The archives declares an intention to make public under the FOI and so forth. That period can be extended 30 business days, but only once. Under an executive order issued by Obama in 2009, any previous order by President George W. Bush, there was effectively no time limit on such reviews. So what did he do, what was going on here? Obama on behalf of the former President Clinton. Kept extending the release of thousands of pages of records from President Clinton’s White House. That were stored in, I guess, the Clinton Library at that time, 30 days, 30 days, 30 days, 30 days, because they didn’t want the public to see them. They didn’t want the public to see them. Isn’t that a violation least of the purpose of the act? They played it over and over and over again. And so Congress stepped in and said, no, you can only do that once because they were trying to cover up for Clinton. You don’t remember that, do you, because it was not inconsequential. It was, it was. And so here we have this. They think they found something, or at least they’re using it as a pretext either way, I don’t know. I can’t be certain either way. A process that plays out over time, suddenly there are criminal issues, the Espionage Act. Not everything I’ve told you is known. By the Department of Justice, everything I’ve told you is known by the U.S. attorney’s office, apparently not by legal analysts, but everything else. They know this. Which is why I surmised on day one, on night one. That this has to be bigger. And the Espionage Act and the Presidential Records Act and all the rest of it. That they’re on a fishing hunt, a fishing expedition, a witch hunt. Or maybe it’s this maybe they just want to trap them on this, they went in Subpena. They knew there were classified records. They sat down with the U.S. attorney and others, they hatched a plot to try and get Trump. On possession. On retaining. Classified information will make Trump fight over whether or not it was declassified the second he. He decided to take the documents. And besides, they’ll say their fallback position is theft. Theft in broad daylight, theft with video cameras available for theft in front of the Secret Service theft, even though the FBI had been there and saw everything theft. Or maybe he was destroying documents. Destroying documents and they take. At least six weeks, maybe eight, to get their search warrant. And the attorney general, meritless Garland, is sitting there rubbing his head for two to three weeks. After they’re ready to roll, it’s just hard to digest all this. I’ll be right back.

Hour 1 Segment 4

It’s very difficult to argue that position now. Now it’s possession, not the Espionage Act is the defining criminal issue for a lot of reasons, including the fact that they could have gotten a subpoena and order enforcing it and collected all the records a year or more ago or maybe 20 months ago. There have been negotiations in the interim, if documents were being destroyed, etc., and there’s an eyewitness, then you presumably arrest the culprit. Plus, Garland waited. At least two weeks to give the go on the warrant, so seems hard to believe things were disappearing or whatever. Why would you wait that long? I think that’s a fair question, don’t you, Mr. Producer? And so these are just things, you know, we’re forced to. Try and put our minds together and figure things out in this regard. But again. This is a process. It had gone on for less than a year before the archives brought in the Department of Justice. Obviously, tens of millions of pages of documents have already been turned over to the archives. Piers, we’re talking about a few dozen boxes. Of which 700 pages. Leaked to The New York Times, the information was said to be classified. I don’t even know what that means. There’s no penalty under the Presidential Records Act. It’s actually a relatively new act in its current form. To be perfectly honest. Was amended in 2014. So it applied to Obama and Trump. So there are some ambiguities, some questions. So classification to me is a is a pretext. You got negotiation, so possession is a pretext. What’s Trump going to do with the papers? Take him to New Jersey and then to Florida and then Florida, then New Jersey. I mean, seriously. Why did this go to a five alarm fire and why did it do it so fast? And as I said, if they had a witness that somebody was doing something illegal, you don’t need a broad search warrant for that. You get an arrest warrant, right, Mr. Producer? You knock on the door, say, we have information that earning Rybarczyk. Was stealing stuff or destroying stuff? You’re under arrest. And if there was an urgency of the kind that they’re talking about in the media. Or speculation by the former federal prosecutors doesn’t look like, look like. An urgency once they decided to go within with a search warrant. Which seemed out of place. They took a few weeks to think about it. And so this master has decided he’s going to protect. We’ve already learned the identities of witnesses. And uncharged parties. And the direction and the scope, the methods of the investigation. I don’t know how much will be left with, but even if he allows 17 syllables to be put out, people will be telling you what that means. The fact is, none of us really know what it means, you notice how I’m not I’m not saying with any kind of. Definitive conclusion. Exactly what’s going on here? I’m giving you my surmise based on. My own experience. Several weeks ago, people were saying, why don’t they release this stuff? I said, well, they could be asserting that there’s classified information. I suspect that’s one of the assertion. That’s my. My surmise. And I think that’s correct as well. When we come back and we’ll do this, we’ll discuss this more tomorrow, when, in fact, the so-called redacted affidavit is released. To the extent it’s released, we’ll dig in even more. But when we come back, I want to talk to something that I think is very important. We have these school districts now that are cutting parents out of the process of raising their children. They don’t want parents to know. If they’re kids and they’re being encouraged, these little kids, to identify as an opposite sex. If Sally wants to be called Frankie, if Frankie wants to be, call them. And these kids are relatively young and they go home to their parents, which is an utterly and completely different environment, and their parents are kept in the dark and intentionally so by places like Fairfax County School District in Fairfax County, Virginia. By the way, I want to make it abundantly clear it’s only Democrats to support this, not Republicans, it’s only Democrats school boards that promote this, not Republicans, it’s only the Democrat unions that promote this, not Republicans. I’ll be right back.