On his nationally syndicated radio talk show “The Mark Levin Show” on Monday, host Mark Levin reminded his viewers that he warned everybody that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh “isn’t that solid” and reminded his audience that Justice Kavanaugh “was never a Scalia.”
“This is the one d--- program, and I’m the one host who kept warning everybody that Kavanaugh really isn’t that solid,” Mark Levin reminded his viewers.
“Now, I defended him to the hilt against the mob,” Levin went on later in his show. “Of course, I would, because that was grotesque. But in terms of his judicial philosophy, he was never a Scalia or a Gorsuch or a Thomas – never ever – any more than Roberts is.”
Mark Levin’s comments on Justice Kavanaugh came after the Trump-appointee, Kavanaugh, sided with the four liberal-leaning justices and against the conservative-leaning justices on the court in writing the 5-4 majority opinion in a U.S. Supreme Court case on Monday that would allow “iPhone users to proceed in a class-action lawsuit against Apple over its control of app sales in a ruling that,” according to The Hill, “could threaten the company’s exclusive marketplace of third-party software.”
Warning about his reservations concerning the then-U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Levin said in July of 2018 that he had never seen a campaign “as aggressive, as nasty, as ruthless, and as dishonest” as Kavanaugh’s and further suggested that “You [would] have to assume that Kavanaugh would have voted with Roberts” on Obamacare given then-Circuit Judge Kavanaugh’s positioning during “oral argument in the Susan Seven-Sky v. Eric Holder, Jr. case on Sept. 23, 2011.”
Below is a transcript, in pertinent part, of Mark Levin’s remarks from his show on Monday:
“This is the one d--- program, and I’m the one host who kept warning everybody that Kavanaugh really isn’t that solid.
“Now, we got into the fight with the Democrats. That was a different issue, what they were trying to do to him and so-forth, but Kavanaugh was not that solid. As you know, I had problems with him from the start. I was criticized. I had judge friends of mine, ‘What do you have against Kavanaugh?’ This! ‘Well, because of the hearings, look what he’s— Look, look, he’s buckling.’ It had nothing to do with the hearings. He was always this way. Why do you think the Bush people were all over this? Why do you think his law clerks were slobbering all over him on National Review and everywhere else? You weren’t allowed to criticize the guy.
“I pointed it out at the time – and no, I’m not going to go back to the recordings, but I could – while all the other hosts were full in. Now, I defended him to the hilt against the mob. Of course, I would, because that was grotesque. But in terms of his judicial philosophy, he was never a Scalia or a Gorsuch or a Thomas – never ever – any more than Roberts is.
“So, if I have time, I’ll get into that too. But don’t let people who are all-in for Kavanaugh philosophically now all of a sudden tell you it was the hearings. It wasn’t the hearings.
“I told you about his decision on Obamacare that Roberts used. Remember that, Mr. Producer? Turned on the tax question. Said that was outrageous. ‘What other examples do you have?’ We had other examples, and I used them.
“I get sick and tired of this positioning stuff, way after the fact. ‘See what happened—’ No. It was always this case. He was always this way.”