Life, Liberty & Levin 8/24/25 | BREAKING FOX NEWSAugust 24_ 2025

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:12):
Hello America, Mark Levin, and this is Life Liberty and
Levin's Sunday. Welcome. We have two great guests this evening.
We have Senator Ted Cruz and General Jack King. But
before we get to them, you know this whole issue
about documents and classification and espionage and all the rest.
I spent a lifetime dealing with this as chief of
staff to the Attorney General of the United States. As

(00:34):
you well know, tons of this material would cross my desk.
I would read it, I'd be in meetings over it,
black operations taking place, all kinds of testimony provided, and
every day it would come across my desk or I
was in meetings involving it. And at the Department of

(00:55):
Justice when I was there, there was an Assistant Attorney
General by the name of John Bolton. Bolton knew all
this too. In fact, we all knew all this. And
here's the thing. I never brought any documents home. I
never took any notes. It never even occurred to me
to write a book about my time as chief of
staff to the Attorney General of the United States, let

(01:16):
alone a book that contained classified the information. Well, why
am I telling you all this? Because it's very very important.
The Attorney General had to have faith in his chief
of staff, just like the President of the United States
has to have faith in his National security advisor. That's correct.
You're not there to gather information, take notes, and if

(01:39):
you have a problem, or if you become disgruntled, if
you're fired, or you quit or whatever, you're going to
write a book about it. That is absolutely outrageous. And
not only that, you're going to make money from the book. Now,
before I get into some of the details here, you're
at the right place at the right time. Of course,
I want to give you some background, background that's never
given for reason. You see this matter involving John Bolton

(02:04):
and his book in the classified documents and information. It
was litigated, and what happened was it went before a
senior judge by the name of Royce Lambert at the
District Court in Washington, DC. I know Royce Lambert well.
I had some cases in front of him. He was
appointed in the nineteen eighties. He was a regular appointee.

(02:27):
There was a point of time, as I recall, that
he was involved in the criminal division or the civil division,
and so there were a case in front of him
on June twentieth, twenty twenty, he issues an opinion and
I want to read this to you. You're going to
find this fascinating. What happened is the Department of Justice
goes into court because John Bolton released his book with

(02:52):
classified information in it. The background, John Bolton accepted a
role as National Security Advisor. This is written in the
decision by j. Lambert in April twenty eighteen. In this position,
Bolton directed and supervised the work of the National Security
Council's staff on behalf of the president. Think about that position,
how important it is. He left his post on September tenth,

(03:13):
twenty nineteen. Within two months, he secured a book deal.
The government anticipates the public officials will seek the publish
accounts of their experiences. When those officials have access to
sensitive information that implicates national security, the government guards that
information by conditioning employment on a guarantee of non disclosure.
Bolton accepted this condition of employment and executed multiple non

(03:36):
disclosure agreements with the government. In one agreement, Standard Form
three twelve, Bolton agreed that he would quote never divulge
classified information to anyone unless a he has officially verified
that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United
States Government to receive it, or b he has been
given prior written notice of authorization from the United States

(03:56):
Government that such disclosure is permitted. In the event Holton
was uncertain about the classification status of information, he was
required to confirm from an authorized official that the information
is unclassified before he may disclose it. Violation can result
in assigning to the United States Government all royalties, remunerations,

(04:17):
and emoluments that have resulted, will result, or may result
from any disclosure, publication, or revelation of classified information not
consistent with the terms of SF three twelve. Bolton agreed
to abide by the restrictions of SF three twelve and
less than until he is released in writing by an
authorized representative of the United States Government. Another agreement, Forum

(04:38):
four four one four detailed conditions Bolton must follow to
gain access to highly classified Sensitive compartmental Information SCI. That's
the highest level. Here, Bolton agreed to submit for security
review any writing or other preparation in any form that
contains or purports to contain any SCI or description of
activities that produce or relate to sa CI, or that

(05:01):
he has reason to believe are derived from SCI, that
he contemplates disclosing to any person not authorized to have
access to SCI, or that he is prepared for public disclosure.
Bolton promised not to disclose the contents of such preparation
with or show it to anyone who is not authorized

(05:21):
to have access to SCI until he had written authorization
that such disclosure is permitted now. In December twenty nineteen,
Bolton submitted a draft manuscript to the NSC for pre
publication review. Of the following four months, Bolton worked to
incorporate the edits he received from the Senior Director for
Records Access and Information Security Management at the NSC, Ellen Knight.

(05:43):
These edits were iterative and extensive, and on April twenty seven,
to twenty twenty, Night communicated to Bolton that she no
longer considered the manuscript that contained classified material. Bolton claims
that he and Knight discussed the possibility that the final
written authorization might be ready as early as that afternoon.
The written authorization did not issue, and Knight soon clarified

(06:03):
that the process was ongoing. Weeks passed without further communication
between Bolton and the government. On June eight, twenty twenty,
John Eisenberg, Deputy White House Council and legal advisor to
the NFC, issued a letter to Bolton that claimed the
manuscript still contained classified information. By that point, Bolton had
already delivered a final manuscript to his publisher from printing

(06:25):
and shipping without written authorization and without notice to the government.
What happened was the Department of Justice under President Trump
went into court to try to get an injunction to
prevent any further printing and distribution of the book. The
judge said yes. Bolton disputes that this book contains any
classified information and emphasizes his month long compliance with the

(06:46):
publication review process. He bristles at the mixed messages sent
by pre publication review personnel, questions the motives of intelligence officers.
Bolton could have sued the government and sought relief in court. Instead,
he opted out of the reviews before its conclusion. Unilateral
fast tracking carried the benefit of publicity in sales and
the cost of substantial risk exposure. This was Bolton's bet.

(07:09):
If he's right and the book does not contain classified information,
he keeps the upside mentioned above. But if he's wrong,
he stands to lose his profits from the book deal
exposes himself the criminal liability and in peril's national security.
Bolton was wrong. This is the judge. The government's submitted
classified declarations for the court's ex party review in camera,

(07:31):
so the court looked at the documents or the notes
or whatever information was an issue. On June nineteen, twenty twenty,
the Court held ex partey hearing for further in camera
review with the government the parties. The judge in the
chambers review the information. Upon reviewing the classified materials as
well as the declarations filed on the public document, the

(07:54):
court is persuaded that defending Bolton likely jeopardized national security
by disclosing classified information in violation of his non disclosure
agreement obligations. Now that is damning. Bolton was the National
security advisor to the President. He was entrusted with countless
national secrets and privy to countless sensitive dealings. To Bolton,

(08:16):
this is a selling point. His book is entitled The
Room Where It Happened. He rushed to write an account
of his behind closed door experiences, produced over five hundred
pages of manuscript for review. Not four months later, Bolton
pulled the plug on the process set the still under
reviewed transcript of the publisher for printing. Many Americans are
unable to renew their passports within four months, but Bolton

(08:38):
complains they're reviewing hundreds of pages of the National Security
Advisors tell alled deserves a swifter timetable access to sensitive
intelligence is rarely consolidated in individuals, and it comes as
no surprise to the court that the government requested several
iterations of review headed by multiple officers. But what is
reasonable to the court was intolerable Bolton, and he proceeded

(09:01):
to publication without so much as an email notifying the government.
The judge's conclusion, Judge Royce Lambert, District Judge, Defendant Bolton
has gambled with the national security of the United States.
He has exposed his country to harm and himself the
civil and potentially criminal liability. But those facts do not

(09:25):
control the motion before the court, and so he denied
the injunction. But that's not the point. That is a
damning statement by a judge and an eighteen page decision
where he looked at the classified information damning, which is
why almost none of the news media are reading to
you what I just read to you. This is from

(09:48):
the Judge, United States of America versus John Bolton, June twenty,
twenty twenty. This is what the judge put out. So
the Department Justice in twenty twenty launches an investigation of Bolton,
a criminal probe into the classified information. What are they

(10:08):
looking at, Well, you've heard of it before, the Espionage Act,
no doubt they are. They even set up a grand jury,
and they're looking under the ESPIONAJAC I assume eighteen Usc.
Seven ninety three. Also for those who are wondering about
a statute of limitation, since this was five years ago,
under the Espionageack section eighteen Usc. Nineteen, it's a ten

(10:33):
year statute of limitations. So no statute of limitation is run,
or it's not even arguably run. And so they were
doing a criminal investigation. And then what happened. The Biden
regime takes over, Merrick Garland takes over, and what do
they do now. Keep something in mind, Bolton's book comes
out months before the election. It's intended to harm Trump.

(10:56):
Keep something else in mind. The so called impeachment Committee
in the House, the Democrats, they wanted to interview Bolton.
He refused. He say whatever information he decided to present
for his book. So it was clearly profit oriented, right,
So he refused to testify to them, not not on
purely constitutional grounds because he would turn around and then

(11:18):
present it in his book. Well, what happened to that
investigation that was launched? I mean, you heard what the
judge said. What happened to that investigation? Here's what happened
to it. June sixteen, twenty twenty one, the Biden regimes
in power the Attorney General's Garland and they issued the

(11:40):
following stipulation of dismissal pursuit the federal rule of several
Procedure forty one A one A two. The parties stipulate
the dismissal of this action with prejudice. All parties to
bear their own fees and costs. That's it, no explanation,
one sentence. We dismissed the case against John Bolton to
kill the investigation. It's done. Why Why where are the

(12:09):
underlying documents that were used? Did he turn them back
to the government? Is that good enough under the federal law?
That's the politics, isn't it? After a scathing opinion by
a judge like this, after the book itself presents evidence

(12:29):
of classified information that was withdrawn removed from the Department
of Justice. Isn't the politics this document, the June sixteen,
twenty twenty one document from the Biden regime, without explanation,
just dismissing the whole thing. Now do you think that
would fly with anybody else? Anybody else? Now, let's dig

(12:56):
into this. So at seven am Eastern time Friday morning,
the FBI goes to John Bolton's home and to his office.
They have a warrant. Warrants are backed up by affidavits
and other pieces of information evidence that they may have.
You need to have probable cause to show the court
of possible crime that was committed and the Espionage Act
as I mentioned eighteen USC. Seven ninety three. There could

(13:18):
be other aspects that they're looking into as well. The
Presidential records actor. Who knows they're looking at the removal, destruction, concealment, use,
misapplication of classified information Bolton's book. The question is what
happened to that class fed information? The documents, notes, other
information all accounted for, they put to other uses. New

(13:44):
York Posts in the cases investigation is broader than just
the documents related to the book, but it's a leak investigation,
they report leaks that they are being investigated. They report
during the Biden administration. Okay, so that's beyond the book.
Even though these pieces of information are in the book.

(14:05):
The fact that any information was used, even if it's
in your head, there's not physical documents or texts or
emails of any kind after your service in a way
that's inappropriate, is enough. So we've discussed this before. In

(14:26):
the document's case, it's a very broad statue, very broad statue.
So the politics was when the Biden regime cut it off.
Now this is the same Biden regime. The unleashed Holy
Hell against Donald Trump as he left the presidency. Within
months of leaving the presidency, the marral Largo raid. Oh

(14:48):
w it's not a raid. Okay, it's a warrant. It's
a search. But it's funny how they're now calling the
Bolton warrn't with a search a raid. But when it
was Trump, don't call a rae. It was a court
authorized warrant with half of Davids. It was unbelievable. Of course,

(15:09):
there's a huge difference Donald Trump was president. It's been
my argument from day one. The Espionage Act doesn't apply
to a president or a former president. Read the history
of it. Read it was passed in nineteen seventeen. It
had no intention of being applied to a president of
the United States, And how could it the constitution, Trump's
any statute. President of the United States can classify or

(15:30):
declassify at will. He doesn't have to go through a process.
He doesn't have to ask an underling. He is the
head of the executive branch. He's in the constitution classified, declassified.
He can declassify on the spot. The President even said
at the time, if I'm thinking I'm declassifying, I'm declassifying.
People mocked it, but he's correct, because there's no way

(15:51):
this statute can legitimately apply to him. That aside. Notice
how aggressively they went after him warrant, they went after
his home, They went into his home, they took photographs,
they made them public, they tried to humiliate him, and
on and on and on with the documents. Oh, we
had all these debates, the Espionage jack the Presidential Records Act,

(16:14):
and went on and on and on, and in the end,
of course, the rogue prosecutor was unconstitutionally appointed and he
lost his job. Yes, it's true, that they dismissed the case,
but Judge Kennon really forced it because she effectively dismissed him. Now,
all that said is this retribution. Oh, ladies and gentlemen,

(16:39):
this is not retribution. Oh I see the sad faces
on TV and the crocodile tears and looked at Trump.
He's a dictator. And so for ladies and gentlemen, you
heard me read from the judge's decision. The issue is
whether any crime was committed. It was the Biden regime
that cut off the investigation cut it off because the

(17:02):
book that came out trashing Donald Trump was helpful, helpful
to the Biden regime. It was used right up to
the election. That's where the politics is. That's where it is.
But imagine being the FBI director, the Attorney General of
the United States and this issue is hanging out there.

(17:22):
The book's still out there. The regime, the Biden regime,
dismissed it without explanation. Never there's never been an explanation
because the explanation's obvious. It was done to help Joe Biden. That's,
in my view, my personal opinion where the reward is.

(17:43):
That's my view. But imagine not having this resolved properly.
No explanation for killing a criminal investigation in the individual issue.
John Bolten's is still out there all over TV, and
so with the song, which he's free to be with,
this never really satisfactorily resolved. Now you know the whole story.

(18:10):
I'll be right back. We're here. We mister conservative, our
friend from the Senate, Ted Cruz, Senator Cruz, your state
is going to add we think, I mean, you still
need elections. You're going to add five Republicans. So the
breakdown in your state will be thirty Republicans, seven Democrats.

(18:32):
One vacancy. In California, where they bypassed the constitution, which
was okay. With the state Supreme Court, which is loaded
with Democrats, it's going to go. They have fifty two members,
they're going to have forty eight Democrats and four Republicans,
So effectively, California will not be representing its people in

(18:53):
any respect. Any way you look at it, Texas, thirty
to seven almost looks like you're being way too liberal
for the Democrats. If you ask me, when you look
at what's happening in California, I'm being sarcastic, but you
get the point. So, this guy Newsom really is a
fraud in a phony, isn't he. He's doing this for

(19:14):
the Democrats, he's doing this for the hardcore leftists. But
he is denying the franchise to millions and millions of Californians,
isn't he.

Speaker 2 (19:23):
Well, Gavin Newsom is dishonest, and he is a hypocrite.
And if you look across the country, virtually all of
the most egregious partisan gerrymanders in the country are purpose
traded by Democrats. California right now today, fifty eight percent
of California votes Democrat. The current congressional delegation in California

(19:46):
is forty three Democrats and nine Republicans. That is eighty
three percent Democrat right now. So fifty eight percent votes Democrat,
they get eighty three percent of the delegation. How about Illinois, Illinois,
fifty four percent of Illinois votes Democrat. Their congressional delegation
is fourteen Democrats and just three Republicans.

Speaker 3 (20:09):
That's eighty two percent.

Speaker 2 (20:10):
Fifty four percent of the state gets eighty two percent
of the delegation.

Speaker 3 (20:14):
How about Massachusetts.

Speaker 2 (20:15):
Massachusetts actually says to California and Illinois, sit down, hold
my beer. Massachusetts, about thirty five percent of the state
votes Republican. They get zero congressional representation. Their nine congressional
seats in Massachusetts, all nine are drawn to elect Democrats.
It is nine to zero, one hundred percent Democrat.

Speaker 3 (20:38):
Now how about Texas.

Speaker 2 (20:39):
Texas right now, about fifty six percent of the state
votes Republican. The current breakdown is twenty four Republicans fourteen Democrats.

Speaker 3 (20:47):
That's sixty three percent.

Speaker 2 (20:49):
So fifty six percent of the state is electing sixty
three percent of the delegation. The new map that is
drawn to elect five more Republicans is going to take
Texas from sixty three percent to seventy six percent. Seventy
six percent is still less than California. It is less
than Illinois, It is less than Massachusetts. It is less

(21:10):
than Connecticut, it is less than Maryland. It is less
than the egregious partisan Jerry Matters. And what does Gavin
Newsom say, Well, eighty three percent is not enough. We
want to basically obliterate the forty some percent of Californians
who vote Republican. We want to take away their ability
to elect any Republicans to Congress. I agree with you, Mark,

(21:33):
if California does this, Texas ought to go back. We
can redraw our map to elect all Republicans. If they're
going to do that, Gavin Newsom is telling you he
doesn't care about democracy. He cares about Democrats being in power.
If they're going to do that, we ought to press back.
And because the Democrats have been so abusive on this,
if Newsom wants to start this arms race, there are

(21:55):
a bunch of other Republican states that can redraw their
maps and at the end of the day, we would
see a significant increase between twelve and fourteen new Republicans
in the House if every state starts doing this. So
Newsom ought to be really careful about the fights he's picking,
although to be honest, he doesn't care. What he's really
doing is auditioning for the left wing socialist and israel

(22:18):
hating lunatics in the Democrat Party because he wants to
be president in twenty eight and for him, for Gavin Newsom,
this is all about presidential politics in twenty eight.

Speaker 1 (22:27):
But Gavin Newsom isn't that bright. Because Gavin Newsom has
to understand the whole country's not California, where the Democrats
have such a significant advantage over the Republicans, and Republicans
throughout the country should also take note. Independence throughout the
country should also take note that what Gavin Newsom is
done in California destroyed it in every way, in every

(22:50):
conceivable way. Now he's destroying one man, one vote, which
is a belief that we've had for a long time
in this country, Ted Cruz. He is desperate to get
the Democrat nomination, But if he gets it, in my view,
as a result of this and all the rest, but
particularly this, he's not going to get many Republican or
independent votes. We'll be right back.

Speaker 4 (23:18):
Weve to Fox News, lie if I'm Griff Jingins. In
New York, President Trump is threatening to send National Guard
troops to more cities to fight crime. They reportedly include Chicago,
New York, and Baltimore. Democratic leaders there say his claims
of high crime don't match the facts. The president is
also now threatening to cut funding to rebuild Baltimore's Francis

(23:39):
Scott Key Bridge unless the city addresses crime. Guard troops
are already in our nation's capital. De Pentagon says they'll
begin carrying weapons tonight, and millions of people out west
are under dangerous heat warnings. Parts of California, Oregon, and
Washington could see triple digit temperatures through Tuesday. The extreme
heat is feeling wildfires, forcing evacuations in California's nap A Valley.

(24:03):
The picket fire has scorched more than sixty eight hundred acres.
It is only about eleven percent contained. I'm Griffchingens Now
back to life, Liberty and Levett.

Speaker 1 (24:21):
Welcome back to America. You know, Senator Cruz, you're one
of the foremost defenders of our country in Congress and
one of the most most defenders of our allies in Congress,
and especially the state of Israel. I want to ask
you a question. We have the Democrat Party that's gone
off the edge here. I mean they really back hamas

(24:44):
they say they don't, They clearly do. It's really that
kind of a choice. They use the hamas data. They've
been lying about genocide by the Israelis. Notice they're not
even talking about it anymore, all of a sudden, because
all the evidence is coming forward, and so it's on
to the next subject. But I want to ask you
a question. Within our party, the Republican Party, there are

(25:06):
significant figures in the Republican Party who have been silent
about this. Donald Trump has been at the forefront fighting
the anti Semitism, defending the state of Israel, dropping the
bombs on the nuclear sites in her Ant, telling them
do whatever you have to do with Hamas, trying to
help them get their hostages back. But there are other people,

(25:26):
including in the executive branch, who basically say nothing or
do nothing in Congress and the Senate who do nothing
and say nothing. I get the Democrats. I don't like it,
but what about the Republicans.

Speaker 3 (25:41):
Yeah, Mark, you and I have talked about this before.

Speaker 2 (25:43):
Something I'm very concerned about is there is rising anti
Semitism on the right, and I don't like it.

Speaker 3 (25:49):
It concerns me.

Speaker 2 (25:50):
We've seen over the past decade rabbit anti semitism on
the left. The pro Hamas wing of the Democrat Party
is ascendant, and virtually every Democrat in Congress is terrified
of crossing the Prohamas wing of the party. On the right, unfortunately,
we are seeing some prominent voices more and more attacking

(26:12):
Israel on a daily basis, repeating the talking points of
the anti Semitic left. We're seeing a convergence on the
right and left, and I think that is really frightening.
You know, a friend of mine asked recently, imagine how
American political history would be different if Rush Limbaugh had
been an anti Semite instead of a philo semi. We

(26:35):
would have a very different politics in America. Thankfully, Rush
understood that it is in America's national security interest to
stand with Israel, because Israel is a strong ally who
stands unequivocally with us. And I got to say to
anyone on right or left who looks at what happened
in Israel on October seventh and sees a moral ambiguity,

(26:56):
sees an equivalence, you've abandoned any sense of rationality, any
sense of morality, and any sense of America first priority.
Because this is not a battle of shades of gray.
This is a battle between good and evil. The Hamas
terrorists that murdered over twelve hundred innocent civilians, innocent Israelis

(27:18):
and innocent Americans. They murdered civilians, they murdered elderly people,
they murdered children, They raped women, they raped little girls.
It was unambiguously evil. And Israel is acting to take
out terrorists. And I'll tell you every Hamas terrorist that
Israel takes out, every Hesbela terrorist that Israel takes out
is making America safer because understand Hamas and Hezbela. Yes,

(27:43):
they want to murder Israelis, but they want to murder
Americans too, And so Israel is defending us. When Israel
attacked Iran and took out much of their nuclear weapons capability,
and then President Trump came in with the bombing run
and took out Fourdoh, the underground nuclear bunker that made
America safe. And so we stand with Israel because it

(28:04):
makes America safer. And I am concerned about some of
the voices on the right that seem to have lost
sight of that and are suddenly are suddenly praising the
Ayatola Kameni, who chants death to America and death to Israel.
The Ayahtola is a theocratic lunatic who wants to murder us.

(28:25):
And President Trump is clear eyed about that, and all
of the rest of us should be as well.

Speaker 1 (28:29):
Beautifully put. And let me be clear. As one of
Russia's best friends, he loved Benjamin at Yahoo. He loved
the state of Israel. He went there several times. He
is a big voice that is lost, which is very unfortunate. Yes,
President Trump is the same, he's out there, he's supportive
and so forth, just so on. So I don't want

(28:50):
to hear that maga we're losing support for Israel. Me. No,
it's the reprobates, it's fake maga. It's the anti Semites,
it's the blowhards, it's the grifters. They're the ones, not magus.
Seventy seven million of us who support the United States,
our allies, and yes, Israel against Tomas and you've been

(29:10):
one of the great leaders in this regard. Ted Cruz,
God bless you, my friend. It's always a pleasure to
have you.

Speaker 3 (29:15):
Thank you, Martin.

Speaker 1 (29:17):
We'll be right back.