November 9th, 2026

Rough transcription of Hour 1

Segment 1
Hello America. Mark Levin Here, our number 877-381-3811.  877-381-3811.  We are negotiating with the enemy again and we’re using his moderators, Qatar, Pakistan and Turkey. And I’m sure they’re very objective and very helpful since all of them have in one form or another condemned the very existence of the State of Israel. And of course in the case of Qatar, the number one funder of terrorism around the world that would of course include the United States as they are the main supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood. Now we’ve seen this show over and over and over and over again and I might add over again. Now there are reports could be fake news. I uh, admit that for sure that the Qataris had a brilliant idea. Why don’t we, why don’t we release 8 bits billion to the Islamo Nazi regime in Tehran? After all this, if they’re choking them off economically, if they’re trying to bring them to their knees economically, why don’t we just give them $8 billion as a showing of our goodwill? Now M. $8 billion would be twice as much as Israel gets over two years. The vast majority of the money that they have received in the past has never left the United States and has gone directly to our federal and military contractors creating jobs here in America. Now I hope we’re not going to have another MoU situation that was negotiated by the Vice President which was basically worse than a surrender, tens of billions of dollars going to the enemy. And I certainly hope we’re not, we’re not going to have another deal, a uh, peace in our time deal of the sort that Obama negotiated. And I’m not saying we’ll have any of those things, but I’m not saying we won’t either. I start from the premise that you cannot contain the Islamo Nazi regime. It is a premise that has been understood by conservatives and Republicans and the Tea party and, and Maga from day one. Jim DeMint said as much when he was a senator. The late great Tom Coburn, who was a dear friend of mine, said as much when he was a senator. In fact, he was a co-sponsor of a resolution saying exactly that. Wasn’t that long ago when the governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, said the same thing. I think he still believes that. But I know it to be the case. If the regime survives, its obsession with acquiring nuclear weapons, which they claim is directed by Allah himself, will not be thwarted because we will never have another opportunity as we do today, to Put an end to this once and for all. Never. In the meantime, the regime, uh, has announced that it will be building many more, thousands more intercontinental ballistic missiles, and it will not honor any distance requirements. Not that it ever did, because it wasn’t supposed to build missiles that could hit London. But they have. Now we’ll see what the woke. Right. Isolationists, who have turned the midterm losses into a single issue about Iran, because they like to lie. But that’s what they do. They lie because that’s what isolationists do. They want you to pretend that it’s our fault. We the imperialists, we the colonialists, we the militarists. That it’s our fault that all these countries hate us. Don’t you know they sound just like the Marxist Islamist enemy within? Because they are exactly the same in this regard. The price of fuel will go through the roof if the regime survives. And once the president leaves, because they will cut off the Strait of Hormuz and nobody will do a damn thing about it. You think a dollar more for a gallon of gasoline is a lot? Watch your gasoline double and triple. And by the way, the price of your gasoline has significantly been reduced over the course of the last month. I see it in my own local gas stations. You want to see inflation and the price of everything go up, you just wait. We withdraw everything from Iran and they have a free hand to do whatever they want. You watch. That’s correct. As for us saving Israel, I keep hearing that in my view, Israel would have wiped out that Iranian regime a long time ago, especially June 2025 when it was pulled back. Just my guess. Just my guess. But hey, look, the isolationists will have their shot now. We’ll see how successful they are. The vice President is negotiating again and we’ve seen how good that’s gone over the course of eight, nine months. So we’ll just see how it goes. Uh, there are a number of people who’ve been sabotaging this war effort, who, uh, have been advising him. Number of people have been sabotaging this war effort who we call podcasters and influencers and their ilk and their type. We even have pollsters who are polling in a way to basically undermine the war effort. And so there’s been a lot of that going on. It’s very troubling. You know, I can remember it wasn’t that long ago when it was really taboo to be negotiating with terrorists. Remember that, Mr. Medusa? In the good old days, you don’t negotiate with terrorists now. Appears those are pretty Much the only people we’re going to negotiate with. And then there’s the 90 million Iranian people who we promised we would help. And now we’re blaming them for not rising up with their bare hands. Of course. Well, we could have helped them. I’ve talked about it over and over and over again. We could have armed them. And others have agreed with me now, General Keane, Victor Davis Hance and many, many others. But apparently that was a bridge too far because the Turks under Erdogan, an Islamist mass murderer himself, he didn’t want it. And neither did the Arab states. What do we owe these Arab states, by the way? What do we owe them? Why are we even listening to them? I have a question for you, America. Why do we have 19 military sites and installations in all these Arab countries? Why? Why do we have 40,000 to 50,000American military personnel and contractors in these countries? We don’t have a base in Israel. We don’t have thousands. We don’t even have a thousand military personnel in Israel on a permanent or regular basis at all. So why? Why, after the Tucker Carlson woke, right, isolationists that have numerous publications and platforms over at the Federalists, at the American Conservative, the Heritage Founder, all these places, why are they not objecting to these 19 military sites and installations in the Arab world? Why are they not Objecting to the 40 or 50,000American military personnel in these states? Why don’t they talk once, let alone a thousand and one times, about these Arab countries dragging us into this and dragging us into that? Why? Can anybody answer that? You know why. M and I know why too. Some of them are on the take. Some of them have been subsidized by them. Some of them want to be subsidized by them. But they’re not Jewish. That’s why. And they’re not even Christian. That’s another reason. Why don’t you find this weird that all of these extremely wealthy Arab states with several hundred million people, need 19 of our military sites and installations, need 40 to 50,000 of our troops? We’re tiny little Israel that is not sitting on reservoirs of oil, has a total of, I think, 14 or, uh, 12 million people, 9 million of whom are Jews. Why is this the case? Ladies and gentlemen, now we just agree. The President just declared on his own there’ll be no more money going to Israel. That’s fine, but why is there money going to the Arab states that have all this money to begin with? Can somebody answer that? I’m very curious about that. It’s not even raised. Not Once. I haven’t heard the Vice President say we need to restructure our rest relationships with Qatar or Saudi Arabia. Has anybody heard that? I haven’t heard that. Why is that? Very, uh, interesting. The answer is simple and the answer is disgusting. I want to talk to you about a little bit more of this. I’ve pulled up and done my research on this, ladies and gentlemen. We have, uh, let’s see here. Let’s see if I can pull this up. I’ve just posted for you a map of where all of our bases are in the Middle East. There’s not one in Israel. Not one. Not one. Why are we closing them? Why aren’t our troops being pulled? I mean, we’re reducing our troops in Europe, right? There are no troops in Israel. Why haven’t we reduced or removed our troops from these Arab countries? I’m quite serious. What do they have on us? Why is that? Yeah, well, maybe somebody will introduce a bill. You know, maybe Thomas Massey or Roy Khanman Khanna. Maybe Bernie Sanders. Bernie the Stalinist is he introduced a bill? I’m sitting and waiting. How about Schumer, the highest ranking Jew in the Senate? Has he recommended it? Not once. Why is that? Why is that? I’m waiting for the Republicans to do it. What do you say, Republicans? Will you do it? Hmm? Why haven’t they done it? Yeah. Huh. Very weird, isn’t it? I think it’s very weird. I’ll be right back.

Segment 2
All right, let us talk about impeachment. Impeachment. We have a constitution that provides for impeachment. We have Madison’s notes, among other notes, that tell us what the framers of the Constitution meant by impeachment. High crimes and misdemeanors. They rejected language that had been used for impeachment, like actions in Britain, because they thought it was too generalized and they wanted impeachment to be used for only the most rare and serious of actions against the public good. High crimes and misdemeanors didn’t mean a criminal code type of an event because there was no criminal code. High crimes and misdemeanors. Misdemeanors at the time did not mean a lesser included offense or something of that sort. The, uh, misdemeanor was considered a very serious offense against the public trust. And same with, of course, high crimes. One of the things they were concerned about was that they not create an impeachment clause in which Congress could blackmail a President. Remember, they created all this stuff from whole cloth. The fact that there’s a bicameral Congress, they created that. The fact that there’s a Senate of the sort that we have, they created that. The fact that there’s a House of Representatives of the sort we have, they created that. They created the office of the presidency, the office of the Vice presidency and entire executive branch. They created the whole idea of power checking power through three branches. Uh, in real terms the uh, ideology, or I should say philosophy behind it goes uh, back to Locke and Montesquieu and even before. So if you’re going to use the impeachment clause to go after public officials because you disagree with their policies and you’re trying to twist it and turn it into some kind of a high crime and misdemeanor, that is violation of the Constitution, you’re doing exactly what the framers of the Constitution had rejected and insisted that we not do. These are real standards. They’re supposed to be applied objectively and neutrally. But when you have people running for office saying we’re going to peach this one, that one and the other one, clearly that’s not the case. And they’re talking about first in the doc going after Pete Hegseth. Why? Why is the real reason. Anybody know? Well of course he’s probably one of the most effective secretaries of war or defense in modern history. But that’s not why. Because they want to give aid and comfort to the enemy. The Islamo Nazi regime in Tehran, they want us to lose that war every bit as much as the woke right isolationists, the Tucker Carlson, his ilk, the Matt Gaetz’s of the world, you know, the gum on the bottom of your shoe. They want us to lose this war just like they wanted us to lose this election because they’re out for power and if the American people win, they can’t get their power. They’re trying to tear down the system and rebuild it in their image and it’s quite ugly, just like the Marxist Islamists. But they want to give aid and comfort to the enemy. They want to undermine the Secretary War in the middle of a war. We have never seen a Democrat party do anything like this before. There have been bad Democrat majorities in the past, but not like this. These are people who hate the Constitution. They’ve told us they want to, they want to shred it and then they wave it around, don’t they? As if they’re going to defend it and that’s why they’re going to use impeachment More when I return.

Segment 3
Well, the Democrats have created some kind of precedent, boy, when it comes to impeachment. You know, the second impeachment against our president. They did it as fast as they could because they wanted to catch him on the way out the door because the election was over, you may recall. So what did they do? They actually held a Senate trial, did Schumer, even though he had become a private citizen. That’s never been done. In fact, it’s absurd. And they did that because they wanted to ensure if they could convict him, that he could never run for public office again because that’s what’s required. So they’re very evil and diabolical. They failed. Of course. They didn’t get the super duper number of votes that they needed, but they held the trial nonetheless. So I got to thinking, and I just posted this, America, I got to thinking you can have a trial of a president who’s left office if there’s a constitutional violation. And according to the Democrats, if there’s not a declaration of war with Iran, then that’s an impeachable offense, certainly in part. So I got to thinking, let us go back to every president who’s still alive and let’s impeach every single one of them because they all took military action of one form or another, some more significant than others. Obama, uh, very significant. And impeach them for failing to get a declaration of war. Well, you might say, but, you know, but, um, Bush for Iraq, he got, uh, he got a statute. It’s not good enough. They said declaration of war. Declaration of war. So go all the way back to those who are alive. The earliest one M. Who would that be? Bush, Mr. Producer, something like that. And work our way through. We got Clinton, we’ve got Obama, we’ve got Biden, we’ve got. We’ve got. And let’s impeach them and put them on trial. See, the Republicans need to get smart about how they make these points. They really do. And not only that, every past Secretary of Defense, now we call them Secretary of War. They should be impeached and put on trial, too. And same with every past Secretary of State. That’s right. Why? For the reasons the Democrats say, that’s why. And that’s what should be done, in my view. Now, uh, Todd Blanche is a fantastic Attorney General. He’s a fantastic lawyer. I will tell you now that he is scheduled, unless some emergency breaks, to be on Life, Liberty and Levin on Sunday, on Saturday. And remember, uh, we have, um, General Keane and John Yu, and we also have on Sunday, our friend Roger Zakheim, who is the, uh, director of the Reagan Institute in Washington. By the way, tonight, in just a few minutes, we have Sarah Huckabee Sanders on the program. Uh, what a fantastic governor she is. She’s just the best. Really is fantastic. So we’re going to have her, too. We got a lot going on. I have an exciting announcement for you soon, New York. Once we get it all inked up, I think we will, and we, uh, want to make that announcement, too. But. So when it comes to impeachment, I also laid out the defenses last week that all these individuals should bring with them. And I will discuss this with Todd Blanche when he’s on Fox with me. And that is since Garcia, who’s a moron, and many of the other Democrats, who are all morons, actually were beating their chests about how they are conducting investigations to determine if there’s crimes and effectively criminal investigations, then it’s my position that every single witness or target has an absolute right to demand the names of every individual who is involved in their investigation. They have a right to demand every single document, text, email, phone call that any of these individuals had one with the other or with any third parties, any outside parties at all. Why? Why? Because you have a right to put up a defense under our Constitution. You have a right to due process, and that includes the right to defend yourself. So Congress does not have authority to conduct criminal investigations. They don’t have authority to conduct investigations for the purpose of discovering crimes. Congress has the power to have hearings and oversight and so forth. For the purpose of doing what? Legislating. Now, they may say they are doing that now, but it is too late. It is too late. The horse is out of the barn. It is too late. Cat’s out of the bag. Because they have already said their true intent. I would push that to the wall. I would. I would make demands. If they want to challenge that, then we’ll go ahead and litigate it. I would have transcripts of what they said, I would have videos of what they said, and I would make it abundantly clear. They have no more authority to conduct a criminal investigation than a man on the moon. And if that’s what they’re really doing, and that’s what they said they’re doing, and that’s what they said. They’re looking for crimes, not oversight hearings, to see, you know, if their rules are being followed or if they need new legislation or any. No, it’s not what they said. Now, this is very important, what I’m sharing with you. Very, very important. So, uh, Todd Blanche is on CNN, and Dana Bash with that dumb look on her face. Unfortunately, it’s more than a look. It’s actually a reality. No, I’m not putting her down because of her looks. I’m saying it’s a dumb look. But even if I were, who cares? Listen to this exchange. Cut forward. Go.  If the Defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, faces impeachment charges, would you represent him?  Well, this has happened before, so we can all look at history. You don’t have to. You know, when you ask me that, you’re ignoring history and including recent history. Yes. The Department of Justice actively defends. Now, some might get their own lawyer. It might be a combination of private counsel and government counsel. My job as the attorney General is, among other things, is to defend the administration. We do that in court in all sorts of ways. And I will tell you, if Stephen Miller. If they try to come after Stephen Miller for these. Whatever it is that Garcia thinks he’s going to do instead of actually just conducting oversight and leading, of course, the Department of Justice will be there to defend him, just like if they went after any cabinet secretary or any person in government. We do it all the time. Department of justice lawyers represent members of the executive. And the fact that Congressman Garcia is critical of that shows a remarkable lack of understanding of how government works. And I would be very worried if I was a member on that committee.  Yeah, so would I. And Garcia sounds like an idiot. So he was beating the drums. He was pounding his fist on the table. We’re going to get these guys. They’ve committed crimes, and we’re going to look into this. And I’m thinking, what a schmuck. And so I posted it over the weekend. I think it was Saturday. Whenever it was, it’s there, and I’m repeating it to you, that he’s created a number of defenses, discoveries and so forth. And I would also, if I were their lawyer, uh, I would also send a letter to them, tell them to preserve all of their texts, all of their phone records, all of their emails, all of their communications of any kind with each other or any party whatsoever within or outside of Congress and the media. And I would insist on it. And I would go ahead and litigate it right up to the Supreme Court if I had to. And so there is that, because the morons really don’t know what they’re doing. It’s really kind of funny. Peter Alexander, it’s on CNN today. He’s a complete clown, actually. Asking Ms. Now. Uh, sorry, asking representative, uh, Pramilia Jayapal. Pramilia Jayapal. Asking her if she would support impeachment. She’s a commie. She’s a commie. You know, if you’re seriously a journalist or a host that, that believes you have some, some connection to the news, your question would be a substantive question about the impeachment clause, about how would this work, why would it work? How would it apply? Instead of will you support impeachment? Cut six. Go.  Pete Hegseth, probably the first name up as it relates to the potential for impeachment. A Republican, Thomas Massie, is likely the one who will introduce those, um, that resolution. Are you a yes on that?  So what kind of a question is it? She’s a hard yes, isn’t she? She’s a tough one. Now he knows the answer. Why would you ask a question like that? Why would you ask a question like that? On what basis would you impeach the secretary of defense? For doing what the president asked him to do and for doing what every secretary of defense has done throughout the history of secretaries of defense. On what basis would you justify the impeachment? And then dig into that, and then dig into the history. He didn’t do any research, didn’t look at the Federalist papers, didn’t look at any of Madison’s notes, didn’t look at any of the experts, the late great professor Raul Berger, or even a liberal professor who wrote a great book once on impeachment by the name of Charles l. Uh, Black Jr. And this came out during the, uh, during the Nixon impeachment and so forth. There’s many. I’ve studied them all. He hadn’t studied one. The media haven’t studied any. They don’t even know the basis for any of this stuff. They just go around and push an agenda and spew their stupidity, much like these woke right podcasters. And they just push it out there. Would you be a, uh, yes or a, uh, no? Of course she’s a yes. She hates the country. She hates our Constitution. Of course she’s a yes. I’ll be right back.

Segment 4
Has anybody seen, uh, Trader Kitarlson around the White House now. I don’t think he’d show his face. That’d be kind of scary. Maybe around Halloween. Wonder if he’s been on the phone to anybody. What do you think, Mr. Producer? You think it’s possible? Yeah. Just want to know. I think I’ll post that and ask so all the buzzards can come in and let us know. Maybe one way or the other. What do you think of that? Well, it’s worth asking, I think. Peter Doocy on Fox News yesterday to wrote Khan Mankana, uh, you’re impeaching Hegseth because Republicans lost. Cut five. Go.  So you’re basically saying you’re going to impeach Hegseth because Republicans lost. I don’t know what the reason to impeach him. If he is the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of War, and he is executing orders of the president, what is the impeachable offense?  He fired generals without any cause. Unconstitutional.  You fired generals without any cause. All right, go back and you’re going to have to dig up Abraham Lincoln and impeach him a few times. He fired generals too. He’s free to fire generals. That’s the power of the Executive branch, you’re free to fire people who are under your tutelage or under your, uh, command. Kind of a stupid response is that from this nitwit? You can impeach the Secretary war because he fired generals. Is that a high crime and misdemeanor? Well, for no reason at all. He doesn’t have to have any reason, you jackass. Go ahead.  Caribbean over fishermen boats without, uh, any authority to do that in a way that was illegal. He’s executed.  He didn’t have any authority whatsoever to take out those boats. Of course the president told him to, but so what? That’s an impeachable offense. Based on what? He didn’t have any authority. So he has to go to Congress to get authority to act? No, he doesn’t. Since when? Since never. Just listen to these fools. Go ahead.  An illegal and unconstitutional war.  An illegal and unconstitutional war. How is it illegal and unconstitutional? Well, we didn’t declare it. Okay, Gonna have to dig up a lot of presidents and we’re gonna have to go after the ones I just said, the ones who are alive. Obama, Bush, Biden, Clinton. Oh, yeah, they’re all going to be impeached now because apparently it’s unconstitutional. It’s a high crime and misdemeanor. Forget about unconstitutional. It’s a high crime and misdemeanor. If you take military action without getting approval from Congress under the declaration of war sentence in the Constitution. That is a complete lie. And so I hope you hear me on each one of these allegations. They’re not allegations. They’re concoctions. They’re fictions. There is literally no basis whatsoever to impeach Pete Hegseth. None. Zero. Go ahead.  Mentioning signal gate, where he compromised our national security.  So he personally compromised national security, and therefore he should be impeached for a high crime and misdemeanor. It’s not a high crime and misdemeanor. And he did no such thing. There was an accident. There was a screw up, but what does that have to do with a high crime and misdemeanor? Nothing. Zero. So he’s mentioned four things. It’s a pile on. Go ahead.  Uh, any other president would fire him. I mean, any other president, even Bush, uh, fired. Any other president wouldn’t fire him. They would have fired this secretary war where 13 of our troops were, were killed as a result of our withdrawal from Afghanistan. There you would fire somebody. But isn’t it interesting? Firing generals is an impeachable offense, but the Secretary of defense should be fired even though he hadn’t done anything that’s fireable. Now. This is what happens when you deal with a guy who is the brain of a walnut. This road con man, Khanna. They’re so desperate to get elected president, so desperate to have power, so desperate they will do and say anything. So in the name of the constitution, they will destroy it. As I’ve said a thousand times. And they’ve turned the impeachment clause into a clown clause for clowns like them. There’s literally no justification for impeaching Pete Hegseth or anybody else in the cabinet. Anybody. Or the president. None. Zero. I’ll be right back.