October 8th, 2026

Rough transcription of Hour 1

Segment 1
Hello America.  Mark Levin here.  Our number 877-381-311.  877-381-3811. I’ll be doing very, very well. I am. We be. I want to start this evening’s program with Marco Rubio. Who’s a superstar. Secretary of state. And the reporters. There he is on foreign soil, on a tarmac hour, pressing him about stories. The sources of which are anonymous. And what you’re seeing right now are the media. The media just. Attacking the president, attacking his entire cabinet and trying to attack character, assassinate. Other Trump appointees. I suspect they’re doing this in coordination with Democrats on Capitol Hill. They’re definitely doing it in coordination with bureaucrats. And I’m going to get into one of those situations briefly. And in many of these stories, they have nothing but anonymous sources. Sometimes they claim to have dozens of them. I suspect they don’t. And then the way they they create the stories is they go to. Individuals. Who share the view of the prior administration and the bureaucrats. For their comment about how awful. This or that in the Trump administration or this or that Trump official is how shocking their conduct is. Because they know these press reports will be used by the Democrats. So it’s it’s an inside outside game. This is not a free press. We’ve been calling it a Democrat Party press for a long time. And for a reason. They’re ideologically driven. They’re cowards. They are liars. But you already know that. So turn up the volume. Here’s a classic case and a classic way of handing by the secretary of state today. I guess got 13 go here on the reporting from The Wall Street Journal that Ambassador GUILFOYLE had. Let me tell you something. You guys are going to ask me this. You’re going to ask me again in Portugal. I know the game, okay? The game is someone gives information to a newspaper, foreign media outlet. The media outlet reports it. You immediately turned to me and say, I need you to respond to our reporting. That’s not the way this process works. Our job is not to respond. Every time someone decides to give the media something without any advance warning, without having any chance to look at it and see what’s in there. That’s not the way that’s not the way you run an organization. And that’s not a serious way to conduct the policy of our country. So I’m not going to comment on a story that literally posted a few hours ago. I get the game. Okay. I’ve been in this for a long time. Within hours, some member of Congress will write you a letter demanding you answer questions to something we’ve never seen before. I don’t even know if it’s true or not true. So it’s just not going to work that way. And it most certainly is not going to work that way when I’m sitting in another country. All right. Very great idea. But I am you guys. I’m not playing this game with you, okay? You guys write a story and then your editors tell you make sure you get a comment from him on something we haven’t seen. Okay. You guys are not going to be our only source of information in the world. I’m sorry to tell you that. And so I want you to understand. No, that’s not the way the process is going to work. The process works well. First of all, the process doesn’t work like this. We don’t conduct these things in a press conference on a tarmac in a foreign country because you wrote a story or somebody else wrote a story because the source gave it to you. So get that out of your head, because that’s never the way it’s going to work with me. It’s a game that’s been played for a long time, but it’s not a game we’re going to play. We’re can we’re conducting serious business here and we’ll handle things appropriately. I don’t even know what you’re reporting is true. You guys somehow walk around thinking that because some source told you something and you reported it. It’s a gospel. It’s not the gospel. It’s not the gospel for me. That’s not the way we do it. Outstanding. Outstanding and he’s got it down. And I wrote in on freedom of the press. He’s got it down. And then they regurgitate the story. It’s recycled by other news outlets and on and on and on and on. It’s called pseudo news. Pseudo news. It’s not news. It’s pretend news. Pseudo news. And the purpose of it is to advance an agenda, an ideology, a policy. And also the purpose of it is to try and destroy reputations and undermine an administration you don’t agree with. And it’s happening all over the place with the media. And there’s a couple of main, main practitioners of this. Politico and The New York Times may be the biggest. Now for the second time and I guess a week, ten days, give or take. My stepson has been the target of this. He’s the senior advisor. To Ambassador Mike Huckabee in Israel. He was an advisor to the prior Trump Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman. What happens is there’s an entrenched bureaucracy in these embassies, as well as at various desks within the State Department. And even when you have a change in administration. They often try to sabotage. The new administration’s priorities in this case, President Trump. The Foreign Service despises President Trump. So there are individuals who are buried into the bureaucracy, including at various embassies. Who have agendas. And they are busy trying. In many instances they gather bureaucrats and other departments for other reasons, trying to sabotage the Trump. Presidency or the ambassador in this case, Huckabee. And so they contact. Very reliable news organizations, reliable for them and their agenda and their party. The New York Times. The bureau chief for The New York Times in Jerusalem. I’ve talked to you about the bureau chief for The New York Times. In Moscow in 1932. The bureau chief for The New York Times. In Berlin during the 1940s, all sympathetic. To Stalin. To Hitler. And then we have individuals who are sympathetic. The Jerusalem bureau chief and others. At The New York Times sympathetic to Hamas. In other Palestinian front, terrorist organizations, the Palestinian Authority and so forth. Now, I want to be clear that I speak for myself. I do not speak for the ambassador. I do not speak for my stepson. I speak for myself. And I always have. And I always when we’re very clear about this. But I know how it works to just like Marco Rubio. I been been around a long time. I served in the Reagan administration eight years and the same stuff was pulled on President Reagan. And pulled on his embassies and pulled on his staff and ambassadors and so forth and so on. So I’m not fooled by it. Rubio is not for by anybody who’s been around a while, who’s a conservative or even a Republican. None of us are fearful for both. So there’s this piece The New York Times put together. Apparently, they’ve been working on it for a long time, and there’s not a single source that’s not anonymous. Not one. And there are many sources they claim. I don’t believe they have all these sources, but it doesn’t really matter. They’re all anonymous. Now, that tells you what are they? Well, they say they’re worried about retribution. Well, who would be worried about retribution, Mr. Produce or a bureaucrat, Right. The story is also laced with information. That was stolen by from our government. Cable information and other information, perhaps violations of. The Espionage Act and other criminal statutes. Information. That belongs to the government and is under the authority and is not to be released without the ambassador say so. But the ambassador was blindsided to. And in fact, the ambassador released a statement that I will read to you soon, which is brutal. Brutal. Because he knows full well. That David doesn’t do anything without his permission or without his direction. They’re focusing on cables. Cables are not used as often as they were when I was in government, because there’s other ways to communicate, obviously, other than a cable. And there’s other secure ways to communicate. So you’ll have bureaucrats. Who draft cables. And they want those cables to be used as the basis. For Donald Trump’s policies. But these cables. And I’m reading between the lines in this article. Are more reflective of the Biden administration. The Biden. State Department. The Biden. Ambassador. Then the Trump policies when it comes to the United States Israeli relationship. And we know that the relationship is totally different than when it was under Biden and the Democrats. And so you have bureaucrats and it’s not just bureaucrats, others who are squirrelled into these positions. And they’re trying to sabotage the policies of the Trump administration, the policies of the State Department under Rubio. They’re trying. To undermine and sabotage the ambassador. Which is why a cable is not sent in. It’s not official until the ambassador signs off on it. And so what this article seems to be claiming is that bureaucrats and others are very upset. Because these cables didn’t go as they were drafted, but instead. David looked at them, which was his job. Some of them went. Some of them were apparently a. Redrafted or adjusted. But nothing went without the authority of the ambassador. I have not asked them a thing about any of this. I’m just reading these story and I know how this works. And I know how it works. And he got one example after another after another. And it’s interesting, they’re very much focused on what they call the West Bank, Judea and Samaria. Because the media and the Democrats and Hamas and the terrorists want Judea and Samaria, the West Bank, to be the next Gaza Strip. They’re desperate for this to happen. And the reporting on this has been shameful. You and I have talked about this. I’ve read various articles and assessments and so forth and so on. And what’s been taking place there? That the real aggressors are the Palestinians. The real terrorists are the Palestinians. Yes, there are some of the of the. And I don’t like calling them settlers these. There’s the indigenous land and the birthplace of Judaism. Since when are they settlers? But any event, of course, in any society, in any community, you’ll have these one offs or two offs or something like that. But the fact is, when you look at the casualty numbers, when you look at the killing numbers, there’s no question who the aggressors are and who the victims are. The aggressors, as in every other instance for the Palestinians and the victims are as in every other instance, Israeli civilians. But that aside. The New York Times headline is How a U.S. Diplomat Suppressed and Altered Reports Critical of Israel. Now. In addition to what I’m telling you. The leaking the. Mission. Of cable traffic or would be cables. Drafts. To a third party. I don’t care if it’s the New York Times Corporation or somebody else is unlawful for obvious reasons, it’s unlawful. And yet, according to this article. They received numerous. Pieces of documents and information leaked to it. Apparently from the embassy in Jerusalem. So there needs to be a. Diplomatic security investigation. In my view, there ought to be a criminal investigation, in my view. I don’t know if it will happen or not, but it should. And when we come back, I want to read you what the Ambassador Huckabee said. And I want to read you what a real journalist said about what The New York Times has done here. And there have been one after another after another, individuals who work in the foreign policy realm. Who also know David and the ambassador and are very sympathetic to the Trump administration and Secretary Rubio who are repulsed. But what The New York Times pulled here. Just like Politico when it came to his wedding. And so you can see there’s a pattern. There’s a target. You can see the bureaucracy that is sympathetic to Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and others. You can see what’s going on here. Unless you’re Helen Keller. I’ll be right back.

Segment 2
The entire purpose of this kind of reporting isn’t reporting at all. It’s to advance the Democrat Party, the bureaucrat. The former Biden regime. The Hamas agenda. This is why when people say they’re winning the P.R. war. Well, they have these media outlets behind them. I want to remind you of the record of The New York Times. I don’t have to go that far back. The picture of the. Of the child that they said was starving in Gaza when he had cystic fibrosis and he wasn’t starving as a result of anything the Israelis had done. The New York Times reporting on the casualty numbers from the mouth of Hamas to their ears. Which now has been proven wrong. Time, time, time, time and again, even by Hamas itself. But The New York Times has never apologized. They did grave damage, grave damage to our way to the United States. Great damage to Israel are spreading anti-Semitism. And now they’re attacking this way. And I want to address it further. Stick with me.

Segment 3
I’m going through this so you can see how the left operates. It’s very diabolical. How they’re attached to the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy supports the policies that the Democrat Party and the radical left. And how they create or try to create controversy. This story’s going nowhere. It’s fallen flat on its face. But I’m not done with it. I want to know who these anonymous sources are. And I want to know what information exactly got in the hands of the third party, The New York Times Corporation. Because that information doesn’t belong to the person who leaked it anonymously and it doesn’t belong to a media corporation belongs to the government. And that is unlawful. And those stories filled with such examples. So early this morning. And by the way, don’t read the comments online. The bats are there. The Jew haters, the Israel haters, the America haters, quite frankly. And a lot of the Trump haters are all in there. They don’t matter. So The New York Times does a great job of stirring up more hate, more Jew hatred, and. Threats against my stepson, who’s done one thing. A call to duty. He’s serving the interests of the United States of America. They try and create the impression. That he is loyal to is from another country and not the United States of America. This is one of these libels. That a rabbi, a friend of ours, and I’ll get to him to point out like the Dreyfus case. So Mike Huckabee writes this morning, The New York Times, where cowardly, anonymous sources did a hit piece on David Milstein, senior policy adviser to him. So they had asked me for a comment. They didn’t use it. But here’s my full statement. They didn’t have the guts or the integrity to use quote. I remember they contacted him before they published the story, but. He said. The elements of the story The New York Times is trying to assemble are so lacking, in fact, that it ranks up with other New York Times farcical endeavors like the embarrassing dog rape story or the totally debunked story about a small boy being shot in the face by IDF in Gaza when in fact the little boy was not only alive but had been evacuated out of Gaza with his mother by embassy Jerusalem to a safe location in another country. They keep him from being murdered by Hamas. He said, I personally and categorically refute the elements of your proposed story and I am surprised that you expect to be taken seriously with such nonsense without even one named source, writes Huckabee. You surely can do better. You should consult your attorneys as to whether publishing such drivel could subject the Times to litigation for defamation. That was his statement that they did not publish. Now. I want to read to you again so you have the full information and you understand what’s going on. There is an independent journalist by the name Eaten Fish Burger. He’s actually very, very good. And he posts online all the time. He said. The ongoing campaign against David Milstein is one of the most grotesque things I’ve witnessed in journalism. In The New York Times has produced what might be its most despicable installment yet. This all started with Tucker Carlson, Folks, you understand. You targeted him. The Times Jerusalem bureau, he writes. The Times Jerusalem bureau chief is gleefully promoting this latest hit piece as an extraordinary scoop, a strange description for an article that largely debunks itself repeatedly undermining its allegations while portraying legitimate conduct as evidence of a sinister conspiracy. Buried deep in the article is an acknowledgment that previous U.S. ambassadors to Israel employed political advisers who influenced diplomatic reporting, and that Milstein responsibilities explicitly include, quote, reviewing and amending information sent to Washington, unquote. That’s quite an admission for an article characterized characterizing his exercise of that authority as, quote, suppressing, quashing and skewing information. Reviewing diplomatic cables as a completely normal standard function. Yet the New York Times repeatedly treats disagreements over reporting as evidence of corruption. Even its suggestion that millstones conduct is unprecedented is bull. You know what? Restarts Responsible Statecraft. That’s the name of a group tied to the Quincy Institute. You’ve heard of them, right, Mr. Producer? That is a crazy ass group. It’s an isolationist group. An anti Israel group. Responsible Statecraft, the Iran linked publication the Times credits with originally, quote unquote, exposing Millstein. You understand folks previously alleged that Ari, a lighthouse, a senior adviser to former Trump Administration Ambassador David Friedman and Biden’s ambassador, Jack Lew, blocked reports that were, quote, critical of Israel, unquote. As if there are no such reports. Right. Then comes the Times admission that, quote, It’s not clear whether Mr. Millstein interventions have affected White House policy, unquote. By the way, the article says that they spoke to a few senior officials at the White House anonymously who were very concerned. I know who that is. And if this individual thinks that, I don’t know who it is. Then he’s a buffoon. I know who that is. In time, you will know who that is to. He goes on for an article portraying Millstein as a shadowy figure manipulating foreign policy to, quote, protect Netanyahu. They dragged that in, too, unquote. That’s a hell of a caveat, wouldn’t you say? By the way, the article acknowledges that Ambassador Huckaby empowered Millstein to oversee embassy operations, approves most diplomatic cables himself, and has personally overruled Milstein when necessary. In other words, the Times describes an advisor operating under an ambassador who retains ultimate authority while portraying him as an unchecked rogue operator. There’s an enormous difference between misleading Washington and refusing to rubber stamp every assessment by career bureaucrats. That’s the deep State folks, particularly concerning one of America’s closest allies. Ambassador Huckaby categorically rejected the allegations, but apparently his defense of his own senior adviser carries less weight than anonymous officials who disagree with him. These anonymous officials. Again, this is the deep state. Disagreeing with career diplomats isn’t corruption. Exercising authority delegated by an ambassador isn’t misconduct. Believing Israel is a valuable and well intentioned American ally certainly isn’t evidence of dishonesty. The Times would have us believe it uncovered an extraordinary scandal when nearly all of it documents is a political appointee exercising authority. The newspaper acknowledges he possesses. If reporters have evidence Millstein actually did something wrong, intentionally or not, put it before the public and let readers judge. Until then, The New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief can spare us the self-congratulation about his supposed scoop, particularly when his own newspapers undermined its central narrative. This sort of journalism excuse me, this sort of journalism is a disgrace, and everyone participating in this relentless campaign against Milstein should be ashamed. It’s not a surprise that they mention the Quincy Institute that’s allied with Tucker, that The New York Times would use it. It’s not a surprise at all. Not a surprise at all. All right. Let’s see here one more than I wanted to. Share with you. Why don’t we take an early break here? Mr. Pritchard a minute or two early so I can find it. We’ll be right back.

Segment 4
I will be covering a number of other things next hour, but I’m laying this out so you can see how this works. If I didn’t have this microphone, this megaphone, you wouldn’t know. And you could take the case of David Milstein and Ambassador Mike Huckabee and what’s going on here and multiply it by hundreds of times, because this is what the media are doing at the behest of the Democrats and the bureaucrats in the former Biden regime. They’re doing it in support of Hamas in this case, in support of of terrorists. That’s the truth. All right. I’m going to, I think, skip over just because of the clock is ticking. Ambassador Huckabee is very furious about what’s taking place. He comes under vicious assault to. By the usual. But here’s Rabbi Steve Burke. Is a very important rabbi. Both. In American Israel. Born an American. American citizen. May well be an Israeli citizen as well. I don’t know, he says. The New York Times has become an embarrassment to journalism. Its latest hit piece, Targeting David Milstein is another example of a newspaper so concerned by its hostility toward Israel that even an American serving his country becomes a target if he refuses to conform to its preferred narrative. This is very important. David does not have dual citizenship. David is an American citizen working for the Trump administration. Says, I’ve known David for many years. He’s a man of extraordinary integrity. And you’re going to hear this from everybody, Everybody. Extraordinary integrity, impeccable character, fierce loyalty to the United States of America. He serves his country with honor, carrying out the mission of Ambassador Mike Huckabee in the administration. Apparently, that’s that’s enough to make him a target. What we are witnessing is a deeply disturbing pattern anonymous accusations, damaging insinuations, and the willingness to destroy a person’s reputation in pursuit of a predetermined narrative that parallels to the Dreyfus Affair are impossible to ignore. A Jewish patriot accused his loyalty, questioned his reputation, dragged through the mud. History has shown us where this kind of prejudice can lead. And the timing? He was about to get married. The willingness to inflict this kind of pain on a young man and his family and what should be one of the happiest moments of their lives is especially cruel. By the way, I can handle this. It’s fine. I can deal with it. I made the deal with it all the time. My family members should not have to deal with this. Particularly since this is such. Such a cancerous attack. The New York Times seems incapable of seeing Israel or its supporters without finding something sinister. That obsession has consequences. It poisons public discourse, encourages suspicion of Jewish Americans. And all you have to do is read the comments. And I discourage you from doing that and raises profoundly troubling questions about antisemitic double standards. That paper that once claimed to report the news increasingly seems determined to manufacture a narrative, whatever the human cost. David’s integrity is not diminished by the attack. The New York Times’s credibility is. Shame on the times. Shame on those who confuse character assassination with journalism. And shame on anyone who thinks that destroying a good man’s reputation is an acceptable price for advancing an anti-Israel agenda. This is a very, very outstanding rabbi. And we know many. We know many. And I want to thank David Freeman, former ambassador to Israel, and scores of others, many of whom you know many. Because everybody knows what a crock this is. And everybody knows when those missiles were flying, those Iranian missiles were flying, and the ambassador and David had to keep running these underground bunkers over and over and over again. There are hundreds of people that they helped Americans, Americans to get planes to get out of Israel when it was under attack. He quietly goes to funerals. Of Americans. Who’ve been killed in this war. There’s so many things that he does in support of our country. And the alliance and the relationship between our country and Israel. But none of it. None of it. Is acceptable. To the pro-Palestinian pro Hamas bureaucrats. To the Biden holdover Democrats. To the deep state. That seeks to destroy. Him and the ambassador. While their main target is President Trump, always President Trump. And the leaker out of the White House. As he undermines the president of the United States. I know who you are. And I’m not going to forget. It’s okay. It’s one thing for these marvelous friends and allies and acquaintances and professionals who’ve worked with them to come forward. It’s another when you’re screwing around with a file. You know what I mean, Mr. Producer? Not me. My skin is thicker than thick. Go after a kid, that’s a whole ‘nother thing. Or a young man. That’s a whole other thing I mentioned in the story. I don’t care. He means nothing to me. I do not fear them. I do not fear Democrats on Capitol Hill. I do not fear our other enemies. I don’t fear them. I don’t even care about them. But they’re not going to get free shots. Not here, not ever. All right. We’re going to move on to some other matters. Very, very important as well when we return.