Thursday on FNC’s “Hannity,” conservative talker Mark Levin laid out why New York prosecutor Alvin Bragg may have knowingly violated former President Donald Trump’s constitutional rights throughout and other established legal precedents during his office’s prosecution of Trump.
Levin called for Bragg’s disbarment, referring to him as a lawless government official and citing the numerous violations as justification.
Transcript as follows:
HANNITY: Mark, we had a conversation last night. I asked you, what would your closing arguments be, and I asked you to tell this audience what your closing arguments would be.
LEVIN: Well, you don’t want to hear my closing argument because I’d be held in contempt, but instead what I’d like to do if that’s right, Sean, is giving my opening argument why Alvin Bragg should be disbarred, why he should be facing a — charges for suborning perjury which I’ve talked about on my radio show for the last three days, and also why he’s in violation of the Brady Act.
We have very smart lawyers, some fairly smart lawyers who are talking about this case. They’re all saying the same thing in a different way because the case is so outrageous, we’re running out of words and explanations for it. None of us have ever seen anything like this.
You have collateral evidence which is unconstitutional, you have somebody being charged and he’s not sure what he’s charged with which is unconstitutional. You have all kinds of allegations being made which are absolutely outrageous, not relevant. You have a dead state statute that’s remains dead today that’s being used. You have a federal campaign law and nobody knows exactly what part of the federal campaign law we’re talking about.
And so, I want to talk about Alvin Bragg rather than keep talking about the same thing.
There’s a Supreme Court case called Brady versus Maryland, and the Supreme Court ruled, and I’ll keep it tight, that the government, the prosecutor must not withhold exculpatory evidence, must be given to the defense and in fact if they know that evidence is false or might be false, they’re not supposed to use it. That doesn’t mean you don’t have impeachment in these other things taking place if a prosecutor affirmatively knows that there is materially false information at this witness may give or any lawyer for that, they are not to present that person.
Now, exculpatory evidence, the Supreme Court says, well, we have exculpatory evidence. Robert — has been here — Costello — on all these shows, look, he’s not Stormy Daniels. This guy is the former deputy chief of the criminal division of the Southern District of New York, does it get any higher than that?
And he was Cohen’s lawyer for a critical period of time, and he’s been on my show, Saturday, he’s been on other shows, he was on a show this morning, he testified before Congress under oath, and he said, look, this guy’s a liar, I was his lawyer, I have 300 emails, I have contemporaneous information, I’m telling you he’s a liar, on top of all the other lies the guy has told.
And nobody wants this guy as a witness. That’s why the U.S. attorney’s office didn’t want him. That’s why Vance didn’t want him. That’s why Bragg initially didn’t want him.
So what happened? What happened is Mr. Bragg. Mr. Bragg should be disbarred. Mr. Bragg has violated the Brady rule. That’s a half a century old rule.
The emails — he has access to the emails, Mr. Costello said he only showed six to the grand jury, but he had access to all of them. Mr. Costello gave that’s contemporary communication between the lawyer and his client for which Mr. Costello got — got a waiver. This is a very, very big case, a very, very big matter.
So when that government witness is on the stand, that means the district attorney and the government are vouching for the truth, the integrity, for the testimony of that witness and that witness was put up there despite the fact that the government knew from these emails of Mr. Costello’s testimony that he’s a liar.
And even if it wasn’t a Brady violation, you don’t have your main witness as somebody who is a complete reprobate and he doesn’t go to prison for a thousand different reasons, he goes to prison because he’s a liar, now suborning perjury. I’ve been talking about this on radio and Judge Jeanine brought it up earlier, touched on it, and U.S. Attorney Tolman brought it up a little bit.
I want to expand on this. We lawyers — we need to police what’s going on here. We can’t just ring our hands, this is terrible. It is terrible, and these people need to be held to account.
Bragg put Cohen on the stand after obviously they worked with him. They knew what he was going to say. Any prosecutor does that, they let them know what kind of questions are going to ask in other words part of this is performance art.
Bragg knew that there were material matters that implicated Cohen. He was aware of it, information, contemporary emails, Mr. Costello’s testimony among others. That’s directly contradicted what his own attorney said and what others have said, and he still put him on that stand and this is material information, this is their key witness. Look at the texts, we still don’t know about the texts.
Well, that’s an important issue, too. Did this government not have his texts? If they had the text, did they give it to the defense? How did the defense get the texts.
And this isn’t the first time. Remember when 30,000 pages of documents just showed up from the us attorney’s office two or three weeks before the case started and the judge said that’s fine, that’s enough time to prepare or not giving a heads up to the defense when witnesses are going to be called maybe they’ll get a five hour that’s a due process violation.
What we have in Mr. Bragg is a lawless government official and I contend that he’s violated the Brady ruling of the Supreme Court. I contend that he and his staff have been supporting perjury.
One other thing before my time is up. Brad Smith, the former FEC chairman. Brad Smith has been on my show twice and he said what he would say. He said he might be called as an expert witness by the Trump lawyers.
He said this is bogus. He’s expert on this federal campaign law. He said there’s no way a non-disclosure agreement in any way is an illegal campaign contribution, and he’ll go through it soup the nuts.
That’s why the judge doesn’t want him to testify. That is a torpedo into the side of the good ship Bragg here that will take it down, that the jury will understand, when an expert, not Stormy Daniels, not all these people off the street that they’re bringing in to confuse the jury, when an expert on federal campaign law gets up there and says, you know what, jury, there is no campaign violation. It’s impossible. Then that case right there, you don’t even need an appeal, will be dead.
So my takeaway is this, this case now is about Alvin Bragg. It’s about — it’s about the Brady Act, it’s about suborning perjury, and it’s about this judge who will not allow this expert witness in because he will torpedo this case once and for all. That’s it!
HANNITY: Wow. Well done. The great one, that’s why we call you the great one. Mark Levin, thank you.
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor