Mark Levin is fuming and is warning Americans who are Trump supporters that we’ll have a new political battle on our hands in the coming months. The battle is one in which the Democrats will do everything in their power to destroy President Trump. The Democrats are determined to impeach Trump and will be going all out to use anything they can to do so.

Levin has already called out the shenanigans from Robert Mueller and his team of 19 angry Democrats (see below). Their volume two of the Mueller Report is full of hearsay testimony from different people. It has not been vetted and hasn’t come under legal scrutiny in court via cross-examination. Levin got down to basics when he called it “crap.”

Levin is now warning Americans who voted for Trump that we need to stand with him in a new political battle like no other:

“The tens of millions of Americans who voted for President Trump and do not live in Nadler’s district, Schiff’s district, Pelosi’s district, etc., need to get ready for a political battle the likes of which we have not seen in modern times. These political leftists who represent these dark blue districts are obsessed with removing and destroying President Trump. And these leftists need to understand that tens of millions of us will not stand quietly for this; we will not be disenfranchised by them.” – Mark Levin

Levin’s tweet included the article from aol.com that says Nadler is using the Mueller Report to continue his battle to destroy President Trump. Levin called this plan out when he said Mueller wrote volume two of the report to set up reasons for impeachment.

OUR PREVIOUS REPORT ON LEVIN’S TAKE ON VOLUME TWO OF MUELLER REPORT:

Mark Levin is livid about the politicization of volume two of the Mueller Report. Levin discussed with Fox & Friends’ Ed Henry the significance or insignificance of volume two of the Mueller report.

The testimony by White House lawyer Don McGahn has been controversial but has not been tested by a court of law. McGahn quotes President Trump in his testimony but his testimony hasn’t been tested in a court of law. Levin challenges Ed Henry by saying we want the truth but we have no idea if what McGahn said is truthful. President Trump hasn’t had the opportunity to refute McGahn’s testimony. Levin then made a great point that in this country you are innocent until proven guilty.

Levin calls Part Two of the Mueller Report a “200 Page Op-Ed” that should never have been written.

He knows that this was written as fodder for CNN and MSNBC and for Democrats Schiff and Nadler:

“This report, volume two, doesn’t have a syllable of legal significance. There’s not a syllable of law in it. It doesn’t matter what McGahn said or what the president said, none of it’s been tested in a court of law. There’s been no challenge to it. There’s been no cross-examination. Nothing. That’s why Mueller wrote this. This is a political document that he should never have been written. A political document that’s 200 pages long that the press keeps focusing on. That’s why he and Weissmann and the others wrote it because he knew you all — he knew CNN would be obsessed with it. He knew that MSNBC would be obsessed with it. This is an op-ed. This is a 200-page op-ed. That’s all this is. No prosecutor who wouldn’t want to be disbarred would ever produce anything like this, talking, well this guy said this, and why did the president say that? How do you know? Well, the prosecutor said. Well, who gives a damn what the prosecutor said? He’s not God. He’s not a judge. He’s not a jury.”

ENTIRE TRANSCRIPT:

MARK LEVIN, FOX NEWS: It’s always good to wake up to a slip and fall lawyer like [Rep.] Jerry Nadler. And they’ll bring their lawsuit and they’ll lose. So this is all about the press. And I’d like to get to that in a minute.

But if I could talk about this report, everybody is focused on volume two, aren’t they, including us. Volume two, what did McGahn say and why did the president tell McGahn not to say this? Why do we keep focusing on this?

This report, volume two, doesn’t have a syllable of legal significance. There’s not a syllable of law in it. It doesn’t matter what McGahn said or what the president said, none of it’s been tested in a court of law. There’s been no challenge to it. There’s been no cross-examination. Nothing. That’s why Mueller wrote this. This is a political document that he should never have written. A political document that’s 200 pages long that the press keeps focusing on. That’s why he and Weissmann and the others wrote it, because he knew you all — he knew CNN would be obsessed with it. He knew that MSNBC would be obsessed with it. This is an op-ed. This is a 200-page op-ed. That’s all this is. No prosecutor who wouldn’t want to be disbarred would ever produce anything like this, talking, well this guy said this, and why did the president say that? How do you know? Well the prosecutor said. Well who gives a damn what the prosecutor said? He’s not God. He’s not a judge. He’s not a jury.

ED HENRY, FOX NEWS: But Mark, they’re quoting the White House counsel. Doesn’t whether or not the president told —

LEVIN: So what?

HENRY: Doesn’t whether the president told the truth or not matter to you?

LEVIN: It matters completely to me. So how do you know this is truthful, Ed?

HENRY: He’s the White House counsel, you think he lied to the investigators?

LEVIN: How do you know this is truthful, Ed? You have no idea. You know that the prosecutor put words in here that he was told by another individual that has never been challenged. President says he didn’t say that so you have no idea. I have no idea. That’s why we have a court of law. That’s why prosecutors, damn it, are not supposed to write essays like this. Now we have a special counsel. And the Democrats knew a special counsel could write a report. They’re not focused on volume one, which is legal, which does cite the law, which was an investigation that found no collusion. That was the purpose of the investigation. Obstruction was not the purpose of the investigation. And he didn’t have an obstruction case against the president of the United States, or he would have brought it. I’m using plain English so even Joe Scarborough and Jake Tapper can understand this. Volume two is crap. Volume two was written for slip and fall lawyer Nadler, slip and fall lawyer, [Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA)]. That’s why he wrote it. He knew the media would run with it.

Volume one, Mr. Mueller should have come up to a microphone, six, 12 months into his investigation and announced to the American people, I have great news, the president didn’t collude. His campaign didn’t collude. There is no collusion. I’m shutting down this investigation. I got [Trump campaign manager Paul] Manafort. I will give it to the U.S. attorney in Virginia. I’ll give this one to the Southern District of New York. He didn’t do it. Why didn’t he do that? And right to the end, they’re trying to get the president’s in-person testimony about something he knew never happened. Collusion. And yet, why is this report even faulty? How can you talk about Russian interference in our election and ignore the Hillary Clinton campaign, and the DNC, and the senior level of the FBI that’s been wiped out by their own conduct? How in the world can you do that? Not interview Barack Obama and Susan Rice and all the rest of them? This is a hack job. Now, where are we here? Where are we here? From my perspective, it’s now a matter of the American people versus the press. Or how I would call them, the unfree press.

Byron York joined Levin and claimed the report is the world’s biggest ‘nevermind’:

So CNN and MSNBC are reporting hearsay as truth to the American people. It’s fake news on steroids.


3,799SHARES

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.