Blog

Levin: The Russia Narrative Has Consumed Our Politics

Annabel Scott
By Annabel Scott | July 12, 2017 | 3:32 PM EDT

Nationally syndicated radio talk show host Mark Levin (Flickr Photo/Labeled for Reuse)

On his nationally syndicated radio show Tuesday, host Mark Levin criticized the ongoing obsession with Russia, saying that the “Russia narrative has consumed our politics.”

“You know, it’s an amazing thing,” said Mark Levin. “Hillary Clinton, on her way, flaming out in the election, pushes this Russia narrative, and this Russia narrative has consumed our politics since just before the end of the election. It has consumed us. And they are going to keep at it; and they’re going to keep at it; and they’re going to keep at it. The system is broken, folks. It really is. It’s absolutely broken.”

Levin’s comments come after the recent media frenzy over Donald Trump Jr.’s decision to release his June 2016 email chain with Ron Goldstone, a music publicist who asked Donald Trump Jr. to meet with “Russian government attorney” who had information “that would incriminate Hillary … and be very useful” to his father.

Below is a transcript of Levin’s comments from his show:

“You know, it’s an amazing thing. Hillary Clinton, on her way, flaming out in the election, pushes this Russia narrative, and this Russia narrative has consumed our politics since just before the end of the election. It has consumed us. And they are going to keep at it; and they’re going to keep at it; and they’re going to keep at it. The system is broken, folks. It really is. It’s absolutely broken.”

 “I’m watching one of the never-Trumper guys on Fox, and he’s almost gleeful – almost gleeful.

“Sounds like Jake Tapper. What we have here is the intention to collude. If in fact the Russians have information that is so damning of Hillary Clinton, I would like to know what it is. Okay, the election’s over. There’s no possibility of colluding. What is the information? Maybe there isn’t any. I don’t know. Is that an intention to collude? No. I want to know what it is.

“This isn’t even circumstantial evidence. It’s one thing built on top of another, one scenario built on top of another, on top of another.

“‘They keep saying that this collusion thing is ridiculous. Now look. Now we know it’s not.

“Why? Did collusion occur? No, but there was intent to collude. Oh, well then, by all means, let’s appoint another special prosecutor. Another! Oh yes, yes. There was an intent to collude, but there wasn’t any collusion. We now know from the information that collusion, in fact, did not occur. ‘But there was an intent to collude, Mark!

“Like hate crimes, the crime itself is not enough, and yet, here there’s no crime. There’s no anything.”