Latest / Honey Badger Radio / 5 reasons the Cornell 7 are owed an apology

Transcript

5 reasons the Cornell 7 are owed an apology · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you may be,
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: and welcome back to Honey Badger Radio. My name is Brian,
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: I'm here with Allison, and this is Maintaining Frame, I guess? Um.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: Yeah, this is Maintaining Frame.
• 0:13
  Speaker 2: Maintaining Frame.
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: What really happened at Cornell.
• 0:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I think that would be the section that this
• 0:19
  Speaker 2: would be slotted in, autistically, in our giant filing cabinet
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: in the sky. Yeah. Alright, so, uh... Shall I do
• 0:30
  Speaker 2: the things before? We're going to talk about the Cornell. Cornell.
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: Cornell.
• 0:34
  Speaker 2: Cornell.
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 0:38
  Speaker 2: Right off the bat. The Cornell 7, the case, I
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: have researched it, and there are three things that I've
• 0:49
  Speaker 2: identified that collapse the plaintiff's case, Jane Doe's case entirely,
• 0:53
  Speaker 2: like demolishes it. And then two other things that completely
• 0:57
  Speaker 2: reframe it into something else. And I mean, I'll go
• 1:01
  Speaker 2: through that. But first, Brian wants to lay the groundwork,
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: what this is, why it matters, some of the reactions
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: of people in the press, politicians, etc. But before we
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: get into it, I want to remind everyone we are
• 1:14
  Speaker 2: doing our monthly fundraiser at feedthebadger.com slash support. So if
• 1:18
  Speaker 2: you want to continue to see us on the airways,
• 1:22
  Speaker 2: then please go there and put some Some shekels in
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: the hat. I did extend it two days because apparently
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: over the weekend, last weekend, there were supporters who said
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: that they couldn't or they thought they supported. And then
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: they found out they hadn't because there was some issues
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: with Cloudflare or a software incompatibility. So if you are
• 1:44
  Speaker 2: one of those people, please go to feedthebadger.com slash support
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: and put something in the hat for us for this
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: month so that we can continue to bring you these analyses,
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: which you are not going to get anywhere else. I
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: guarantee it. So once again, feedthebadger.com slash support. And if
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: you don't go there between now and like partway through
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: the show, I will shill upon you. I will do
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: what I can to encourage you to support us, because
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: I would like to get us out of the... We're
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: about 1,250 to go, and I'd like to get us
• 2:17
  Speaker 2: under 1,000 at least by the end of this. So
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: that would probably be 10 of you putting $ 25 in.
• 2:23
  Speaker 2: So again, feedthebadger.com slash support. All right, let's go ahead, Brian.
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: All right, so we're going to talk about the Cornell 7.
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: If you have been... I don't know if you heard,
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: it's been all over the internet. And the Lindsay Clancy
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: case is basically like, you know, out of fashion. That's
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: so earlier and that was so September. We're in October now,
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: so it's time to move on to the next thing.
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: So what is the Cornell 7 case? So the primary
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: recent high profile case, the 2024. So this is from
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: two years ago. just like the Lindsay Clancy case was from,
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: I think it was from 2024 or 2023 as well,
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: the Cornell University Chi Phi fraternity allegations involving an anonymous
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: undergraduate known as Jane Doe, who is a Tri-Delta-Delta-Delta-Delta sorority member,
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: which became national news in September and October of this year.
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: after she filed a civil lawsuit. So not a criminal one,
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: but a civil one. It involves claims of drugging and
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: sexual assault by multiple members of Chi Phi of Xi
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: Chapter Fraternity House on the night of October 19th and
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: 20th of 2024, a campus police report and condensed statement,
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: a Title IX investigation that led to discipline and the
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: chapter's barring from campus, So there was already consequences, even
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: though the case is, I guess it hasn't even really
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: officially started yet. A decision by Tompkins County District Attorney
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: Matthew Van Houten not to pursue criminal charges in late 2024.
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: A September 2026 civil lawsuit naming the university, the fraternity,
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: seven named men and others. Public outcry reopening of the
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: criminal inquiry for possible grand jury review. and related reviews
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: by the university and state officials. No criminal charges, important detail,
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: no criminal charges have been filed as of basically this month.
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: Accounts differ in emphasis and some details between Doe's later
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: lawsuit narrative, her 2024 sworn police statement as summarized by
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: the DA and media, and the full interview transcript portions
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: reported by media, university findings, and statements from the accused
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: of their counsel. So what's the timeline? Jane Doe arrived
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: at Cornell as an 18-year-old freshman in August of 2022
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: from out of state. She joined Tri-Delta, which is her sorority.
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: The lawsuit references broader campus reports of sexual misconduct and
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: prior fraternity-related incidents. No details right now. On the night
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: of October 19th and 20th, so almost like literally two
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: years ago to the day, because this is in 2024,
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: so two years after she started college, according to the
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: civil complaint, Doe, then 20, drank at the Tri-Delta house,
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: then attended a sorority social at Mooney's Bar and Nightclub
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: in Ithaca. Staff marked her hands with X's, indicating under
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: 21 status, but allegedly still served her. she and others
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: went to another bar. By around 11 p.m., after roughly
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: 10 standard drinks in a few hours and visibly intoxicated,
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: she went alone to Chi Phi House to see a
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: male friend, a fraternity member. Lawsuit allegations. Here are the
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: lawsuit allegations. The friend gave her more alcohol. A threesome
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: was proposed. She was pressured to snort what was described
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: as ketamine, use marijuana, and drink more. Sexual activity followed
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: while she was allegedly unable to consent due to intoxication
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: slash incapacitation. It's also worth noting that all of the
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: men were also intoxicated. So, just so you know. Additional
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: men entered after group Snapchat messages and shy-fi actives, screenshots
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: included in the lawsuit, including references to, and I'm gonna
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: use a little bit of language here, colorful language, free
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: pussy upstairs, Shop still open. Allegations include further sexual acts,
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: ketamine snorted off her body, physical contact she found, according
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: to her, afterwards, uncomfortable, and her being taken to another room.
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: The suit claims the assault lasted hours and she lost
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: consciousness around 5.45 a.m. while completely incapacitated. Contemporaneous or near-term
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: messages reported later One defendant later texted that he and
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: another felt bad for being too intoxicated to shut it down.
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: Doe replied at the time that none of the sexual
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: stuff was illegal. This is what she said. Her attorney
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: has attributed this to trauma slash denial. Immediately in the
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: aftermath of this, Doe later sought medical care for a
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: UTI that she described as linked to trauma and STI testing.
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: The lawsuit criticizes the response as inadequate, recommendation for therapy
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: rather than more specialized care or a rape kit. Word
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: of this spread on campus. Encouraged by friends, this is
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: the reporting and initial police handling of this in November
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: of 2024, so we're still two years in the past, okay?
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: Encouraged by friends, Doe reported to Cornell University Police on
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: or about November 8th. So this is nearly a month
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: after the incident. She went to university police, not actual
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: police as well. She was interviewed over hours, so November
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: 14th and 15th, producing a lengthy transcript reported at around
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: 120 pages. In the interview, she stated things including that
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: she was pretty okay with initial activity, later became extremely uncomfortable,
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: slash tired, slash intoxicated. And here's a quote from the transcript.
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: The most intoxicated I've ever been, end quote. She felt coercion,
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: had memory gaps, described being hit, and said, I can
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: say with a 100% confidence I was raped, end quote.
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: And did not remember the very end where she was raped.
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: So she says that she was, but also says you
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: can't remember where she was. She also described asking to
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: stop at points and activity stopping and considering more ketamine
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: to pass out in order to escape her situation. Campus
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: police prepared a condensed six-page voluntary... Can I correct something there? Yes, what?
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: Can I correct something there?
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 9:18
  Speaker 2: She said that she was considering more ketamine. And this
• 9:24
  Speaker 2: is retroactively. So this is testimony well after the event.
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: Yes, yes.
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: And we'll go through all of the events that led
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: to her giving testimony to Cornell. But what she actually
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: said was that she was considering taking more ketamine to
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: pass out because then they would know it was rape
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: or it would be rape or something.
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: Yeah, right, right.
• 9:51
  Speaker 2: It speaks to intent. It sounds very inflammatory. It sounds
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: very damning of the defendants, but it actually speaks to
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: her having presence of mind at the time if she
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: was conjecturing and planning. But anyway, continue. Continue, Brian.
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah. So the DA stated, that's the district attorney,
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: stated it characterized participation in drug use and sexual conduct
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: as voluntary, conscious, and consensual. did not allege that she
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: was drugged against her will or gang raped in those terms,
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: which is basically how this is being framed right now,
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: and that activity stopped when she asked. So she asked
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: to stop at one point and they stopped. Critics and
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: reporting note the summary omitted or softened some of the
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: stronger language from the full interview, including the explicit I
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: was raped statement, and that the DA later said he
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: had not seen the full transcript at the time. Cornell
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: temporarily suspended the Chi Phi chapter and the seven accused students.
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: A campus crime alert referenced a report of sexual assault
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: by several males and coerced ketamine slash other drug use.
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: The National Chi Phi Organization later expelled members after the
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: chapter removed them. In late 2014, Van Houten's office, that's
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: the DA, reviewed the condensed statement, including multiple prosecutors and investigators,
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: and declined to pursue criminal charges. So they decided not
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: to pursue criminal charges, okay, at the time. This is 2024.
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: Including the facts that, as set forth, did not meet
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: the legal elements under New York law for charges, which
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: require showing forcible compulsion, clearly expressed non-consent or incapacity from
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: a substance administered without consent, among other factors. New York
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: law has been discussed in coverage regarding voluntary intoxication not
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: automatically equating to incapacity to consent in the same way
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: as non-consensual drugging. Van Houten later described the behavior as
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: disgusting and morally reprehensible, but maintain the 2024 legal assessment
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: was correct based on the materials then available. So basically saying, look,
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: I think it's disgusting and reprehensible, but it's not rape.
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: It's not illegal. He said Doe did not ask him
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: to reconsider at the time. How did the university react? Oh, yeah,
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: go ahead.
• 12:18
  Speaker 2: It is disgusting and reprehensible. But I would argue it's
• 12:22
  Speaker 2: disgusting and reprehensible not for the parties that everybody is currently,
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: you know, witch hunting. That is the defendants. But continue, continue.
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah. So Cornell, the university, conducted a comprehensive investigation... dozens
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: of interviews with witnesses and hearings. Materials later obtained by
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: the New York Times, over 1,000 pages for the administrative process,
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: included the police transcript and summary, interviews with most of
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: the accused and many witnesses, messages, et cetera. Outcomes included
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: a range of sanctions, expulsions for some, other disciplines for others.
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: Cornell has disputed characterizations that most only wrote essays. The
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: Chi Phi chapter was barred from campus and remains closed.
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: So to this day, that chapter is gone or closed down.
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: One reported detail from proceedings involved an apology from a
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: respondent acknowledging possible issues with consent slash intoxication awareness. Doe
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: ultimately left Cornell due to the incident.
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: That is an exaggeration. That's an exaggeration. There was one
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: brother who said, or like... Kappa whatever brother who said
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: that they were they felt bad that they were too
• 13:41
  Speaker 2: intoxicated to shut this down the situation down right that's
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: not that is not culpability it I mean it's it's
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: it looks like it's damning but it isn't Right. It's
• 13:53
  Speaker 2: just somebody who basically was not in a position to
• 13:58
  Speaker 2: to end what was going on. But there are other
• 14:01
  Speaker 2: additional factors that nobody is talking about, as far as
• 14:04
  Speaker 2: I can tell, about who is was actually the one
• 14:10
  Speaker 2: pushing this. I don't maybe pushing is the wrong word,
• 14:13
  Speaker 2: but we'll get to that. Please continue. All right.
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: So, no, it's fine. Um, some accused have denied involvement
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: or specific acts through counsel. One denied any touching another
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: acknowledged misconduct and sending a message, but denied participating in
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: the sexual activity or drug use. Now what's the aftermath
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: of this as of two years later, intense media coverage
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: for some reason. Um, I don't know where campus reactions,
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: online discussions and political attention has followed. Van Houten reopened
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: the criminal inquiry, citing community pressure and potential additional evidence,
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: and said he would present to a grand jury, including
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: possible testimony from Jane Doe. He has sought to meet
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: with her and requested fuller materials. Cornell has defended its
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: Title IX process as thorough and consequential, supports grand jury review,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: and agreed to an independent outside investigation into its handling.
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: following calls from New York Governor Kathy Hochul, who also
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: had some words about this case as well. The state
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: attorney general's office is also reviewing aspects. Local officials have
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: commented on permitting and policing coordination. The case remains active
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: with no criminal charges filed and the civil suit ongoing.
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: Coverage has highlighted discrepancies between the 2024 statement as summarized
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: and the lawsuit. New York consent slash intoxication law issues
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: campus sexual misconduct rates, and institutional responses. So that's kind
• 15:48
  Speaker 1: of like the short version. I mean, I know I
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: read for a while, but I'm just saying like I
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: had to go through two years of timeline relatively quickly.
• 15:58
  Speaker 2: Thank you, Brian.
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: But yeah, that's kind of like a summary of the
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: publicly reported facts.
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: Allegations, and statements. Okay. And I would say that's honestly
• 16:10
  Speaker 2: really leaning on the defendant's side because a lot of
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: what you're taking is from her court filings. So what
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: she's filed in the civil suit, in many cases, what
• 16:22
  Speaker 2: she's filed in the civil suit over claims what was
• 16:26
  Speaker 2: in her sworn affidavit that she gave to the DA
• 16:29
  Speaker 2: in 2024. So we have, essentially the documents we're working
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: with are her sworn affidavit that she gave to the
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: DA in 2024, which was brought into evidence and considered,
• 16:45
  Speaker 2: and then no charges were laid. Then we have the
• 16:49
  Speaker 2: testimony that she gave to, I believe, Cornell police in
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: about the same time, which was then, became the sworn
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: affidavit that she gave to the DA. Which is, this
• 17:02
  Speaker 2: has become a contested issue because people in the press
• 17:07
  Speaker 2: are saying that the testimony given to Cornell police was,
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: it didn't contain, like what was given eventually to the
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: DA didn't contain everything in the testimony to the Cornell police.
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: So they're alleging that there's kind of a miscarriage of justice. However,
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: and I'll go into that, but then those are the
• 17:28
  Speaker 2: two documents and that's the contest between those two documents,
• 17:32
  Speaker 2: whether or not the DA got the full testimony. And
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: then there is also the contents of her civil lawsuit,
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: which a lot of what you talked about today comes
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: from that. So that's entirely her story. And I would
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: like to point out that we are adjudicating right now
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: in the public And in the civil law, her testimony.
• 17:55
  Speaker 2: This is all her testimony at this point. I mean,
• 17:59
  Speaker 2: I've been trying to track down the men's testimony and
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: I found like one that actually speaks to this. So
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: everything we're talking, this is a he said, she said case.
• 18:09
  Speaker 2: And so far it's only she said. And already it's
• 18:13
  Speaker 2: like a huge, like gigantic plume of confusion and haze.
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: because she is saying this thing, that thing, another thing.
• 18:23
  Speaker 2: And I mean, I'm not saying that she is being misleading,
• 18:27
  Speaker 2: but what she described in her sworn affidavit to the DA,
• 18:34
  Speaker 2: he's right. It doesn't constitute a crime under New York law.
• 18:40
  Speaker 2: So what's happening, I mean, did you want to continue
• 18:42
  Speaker 2: with it or are we ready for?
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: No, we can get into, I mean, I know that there's, like,
• 18:50
  Speaker 1: texts that, you know, that she made that didn't make
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: it sound like she had any regrets at all and
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: stuff like this. But, you know, I mean, I just... Yeah,
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: we can. I mean, I basically gave a short summary
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: and like working with the information.
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: So I'm just saying, are you ready for the train
• 19:08
  Speaker 2: to leave the station? Yeah. On this. OK, so I identified, again,
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: three places where the defendant's case collapses entirely and not
• 19:18
  Speaker 2: just the defendant, but the defendant. the whole sort of
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: prosecutorial circus around this, what they're trying to do. And
• 19:28
  Speaker 2: the first is the issue with the DAs, the sworn
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: affidavit sent to the DA versus the testimony that Cornell
• 19:35
  Speaker 2: police got from the accuser. So one of the big
• 19:40
  Speaker 2: controversies in the media is that allegedly Cornell didn't give
• 19:45
  Speaker 2: her testimony to the DA, right? she had counsel during
• 19:51
  Speaker 2: this process, so her counsel, if he was concerned she
• 19:54
  Speaker 2: wasn't being represented properly, himself could have requested the testimony
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: and given it to the DA. But this has become
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: a big part of the controversy over failure of justice.
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: But I just want to point out, so No criminal
• 20:10
  Speaker 2: charges exist, and nothing was ever dismissed. So Tompkins County
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: DA Matthew Van Houten declined to present the case in 2024.
• 20:19
  Speaker 2: He reopened it on the 28th of September this year
• 20:24
  Speaker 2: and began convening a grand jury based supposedly on this
• 20:27
  Speaker 2: new testimony. Then the governor removed him. Kathy Hochul appointed
• 20:33
  Speaker 2: Attorney General Letitia James as special prosecutor. saying she had
• 20:38
  Speaker 2: lost faith in the local district's ability to handle the case.
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: Her stated basis, according to news reports, she could not
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: have been clearer that she was 100% confident that she
• 20:47
  Speaker 2: had been raped. Okay, so this is the detail in
• 20:51
  Speaker 2: her testimony that didn't end up in her sworn affidavit
• 20:54
  Speaker 2: to the DA. She said she was 100% confident she
• 20:58
  Speaker 2: had been raped. That sounds really damning, doesn't it? Except
• 21:02
  Speaker 2: what is her definition of being raped? That's the question before.
• 21:07
  Speaker 2: Is it consistent with the New York law definition of
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: having been raped? There's a big question here. There could
• 21:13
  Speaker 2: be a gigantic chasm between the two and spoilers there is.
• 21:17
  Speaker 2: But the point is that they have now removed the
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: attorney general, Van Houten, from his position because of this,
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: or at least from the prosecution of this. They've removed
• 21:30
  Speaker 2: him because he applied the law correctly. And this is actually,
• 21:36
  Speaker 2: in removing him, they are acknowledging that. Okay?
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 21:42
  Speaker 2: It cites, okay, so first of all, it cites the
• 21:44
  Speaker 2: news report. So this, by this special prosecutor, is citing
• 21:49
  Speaker 2: news reports, not the case on file.
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: Sure.
• 21:53
  Speaker 2: It's the 100% confident line is a conclusion, not an
• 21:58
  Speaker 2: account of acts. Van Houten's own response when told of it,
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: that wasn't information that I had, first off. Second of all,
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: that is a legal conclusion. So she's making a legal conclusion.
• 22:09
  Speaker 2: Legal conclusions can be false, right? She's not asserting a fact.
• 22:17
  Speaker 2: Whether or not she was raped is not based on
• 22:20
  Speaker 2: her feelings about it or even her legal conclusions. It's
• 22:23
  Speaker 2: based on the facts of the case, just like the
• 22:27
  Speaker 2: Lindsay Clancy case. I hate to tell you, ladies, law
• 22:31
  Speaker 2: is about facts.
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 22:33
  Speaker 2: It comes from the leaked interview transcript, the same document
• 22:37
  Speaker 2: in which, when asked by the investigator about the events
• 22:41
  Speaker 2: of the night, was it no? So she basically asked,
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: the investigator asked her, when in context, she said, was,
• 22:50
  Speaker 2: did you say no? Was it a no? Or was it,
• 22:55
  Speaker 2: I'm tired? I'm tired. OK, and this is this is
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: wasn't I don't in context, it wasn't leading. She was
• 23:03
  Speaker 2: talking about, I guess, being tired. And she replied, I
• 23:08
  Speaker 2: think it's I'm tired. OK, so when asked, was it
• 23:14
  Speaker 2: no or I'm tired, she said, oh, I think it
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: was I'm tired. She didn't want the sex because she
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: was tired. Apparently. She states, and then Jane Doe goes
• 23:25
  Speaker 2: on to state the standard herself, the standard what she
• 23:28
  Speaker 2: means by I was 100% raped. In her Title IX interview,
• 23:34
  Speaker 2: she says she had not shown excitement and enthusiasm, which
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: is kind of the basis of consent. That's the campus standard,
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: not the penal law, which requires force, incapacity, or refusal
• 23:48
  Speaker 2: a reasonable person would understand. Okay? So her understanding of rape,
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: when she says, I'm 100% sure it was rape, was
• 23:58
  Speaker 2: that it's rape unless she's enthusiastic and excited. And since
• 24:02
  Speaker 2: she was tired, ipso facto, it was non-consensual. Do you
• 24:11
  Speaker 2: see where I'm getting at here?
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: Yeah. When she's saying, go ahead. I was just going
• 24:18
  Speaker 1: to say one of the seven actually claimed that he
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: was sexually assaulted by her. Do you know about that?
• 24:24
  Speaker 2: Oh, I would not be. Oh, my God.
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: Do you want to hear about it?
• 24:29
  Speaker 2: That's a game changer.
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: This is part of the statement. Yes, definitely. So one
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: of the fraternity brothers, Gilio Lopez, who along with Mr.
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: Newell lived in the room where the sexual encounters took place,
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: said that he had, quote, a pretty solid recollection, end quote,
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: of the night because in his view, he had not
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: drunk that much. roughly six beverages. She had at least 10,
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: so we know, and a bunch of drugs too. He
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: estimated in the form of three Keystone beers and three
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: vodka and Hawaiian punch mixed drinks. When asked about his
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: involvement with Jane Doe, Mr. Lopez said that she initiated
• 25:03
  Speaker 1: their sexual contact and did not ask for his consent,
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: a statement flatly at odds with her account of the night. Mr.
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: Lopez left around 2 a.m., he said, after he said
• 25:14
  Speaker 1: he became uncomfortable and went with three friends to McDonald's.
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: He said that he did not tell them about what
• 25:19
  Speaker 1: had transpired, in part because he was admittedly a bit
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: embarrassed about what had happened, according to the interview rewards.
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: So there you go. Lopez was one of the guys,
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: I think he's one of the seven, and he said
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: that she made a move on him. So.
• 25:35
  Speaker 2: Okay, so what... Is there any details, like specifics? I
• 25:38
  Speaker 2: don't mean to be lurid, but... No, it's okay.
• 25:41
  Speaker 1: I don't see... No, I just see that she tried
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: to initiate sexual contact, did not ask for... She initiated
• 25:47
  Speaker 1: sexual contact and did not ask for his consent. That's it. Okay. Oh,
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: and also, another guy named Mr. Lee, who was also
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: one of the men here, also said that Jane Doe
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: initiated sexual activity without asking. He said she snorted a
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: line of ketamine off Oh, he said he snorted a
• 26:06
  Speaker 1: line of ketamine off her body and she tried to
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: initiate sex. I kind of took a, took a step
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: back because I didn't want to engage in anything like sex. Mr.
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: Lee said, I thought it wasn't the time for that.
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: So basically he just saw her as a pipe or
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: whatever you do used to snort ketamine, but not to
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: have sex with. I mean, that's draws, I got to
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: draw the line somewhere, I guess, but yeah, I mean,
• 26:25
  Speaker 1: I'm not trying to laugh at it. It's just kind
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: of a weird situation.
• 26:28
  Speaker 2: But anyway, overall it's, Yeah. It's kind of the situation
• 26:32
  Speaker 2: where common sense would suggest you just sort of turn
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: right around and go back to your study group.
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: Last part of this, I'll read out real quick. He said,
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: but later that night, Lee, the guy I just talked about,
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: said that he asked for Jane Doe's consent before engaging
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: in a threesome with her. He recalled telling Jane Doe that, quote,
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: if you're uncomfortable with any of this or you won't
• 26:55
  Speaker 1: want to do this, that's perfectly fine. We can call
• 26:58
  Speaker 1: it a night. he said, and Jane Doe, he said
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: that Jane Doe replied, we're all consenting adults here. So,
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: there you go.
• 27:07
  Speaker 2: Well, apparently not.
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: Apparently there's someone who isn't. But that's interesting that she was,
• 27:18
  Speaker 2: according to some of their testimony, she was initiating.
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and that she wasn't that drunk. They're saying that
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: she According to them, she didn't slur her words, she
• 27:28
  Speaker 1: did not appear to be drunk. She was just down.
• 27:31
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: She was DTF. Yeah.
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I gotcha. And again, she's making it out that...
• 27:39
  Speaker 2: And this is the campus standard, right? It's supposed to
• 27:42
  Speaker 2: be excitement and enthusiasm.
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: Apparently.
• 27:47
  Speaker 2: That's not the standard for men. It's just whether or
• 27:49
  Speaker 2: not you can get them to comply. But the standard
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: for women is that they have to express excitement and enthusiasm.
• 27:55
  Speaker 2: And if they don't do that, then it's rape. And
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: that's the standard. She's apparently, according to this, according to
• 28:03
  Speaker 2: her own words, that is what she is holding them to.
• 28:08
  Speaker 2: But unfortunately, that's not the legal standard in New York.
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: But here's the thing, okay? They are now trying to
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: get the law changed, Hochul says. If someone is too,
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: that is the.
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: Yeah, she wants to change the standard.
• 28:27
  Speaker 2: The governor, they want to change the law.
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: She wants to change the law to close voluntary intoxication
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: loophole so women cannot consent to sex when drunk or high.
• 28:38
  Speaker 2: Yeah, essentially. Of course, it doesn't apply to men because
• 28:41
  Speaker 2: apparently these guys were also extremely drunk and high when
• 28:44
  Speaker 2: this happened. All right, so if someone is too intoxicated
• 28:48
  Speaker 2: to consent, it should not matter whether they chose to
• 28:51
  Speaker 2: use drugs or alcohol. Well, first of all, that's already covered, right?
• 28:57
  Speaker 2: It's already covered by the current law, incapacitation. If you
• 29:01
  Speaker 2: choose to drink and you get blackout drunk and someone,
• 29:04
  Speaker 2: you know, unconscious and someone takes advantage of you, that's
• 29:08
  Speaker 2: still considered rape under New York law. So the question
• 29:11
  Speaker 2: here is, was she capable of knowing what was happening
• 29:15
  Speaker 2: to her?
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 29:17
  Speaker 2: And based on her own testimony, she was. I'm not
• 29:23
  Speaker 2: bringing in anything else or even referencing anything the men said.
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: When you look through her testimony, she is making decisions throughout.
• 29:33
  Speaker 2: And one part, I mean, it's a little bit confused
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: and understandably because it's two years ago, but you know,
• 29:38
  Speaker 2: one part she's talking about refusing further sexual acts and
• 29:43
  Speaker 2: apparently the sexual acts didn't take place. So someone either,
• 29:48
  Speaker 2: or either she, the word she was, it came through
• 29:51
  Speaker 2: to them that she was refusing and that's her own testimony.
• 29:57
  Speaker 2: So the timeline of her testimony doesn't support what she's asserting,
• 30:05
  Speaker 2: that this is sexual assault under the law, under New
• 30:09
  Speaker 2: York law. And they know that because they're trying to
• 30:12
  Speaker 2: change the law. You see that? Like right here, they
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: know what happened was not sexual assault. Because now they're
• 30:21
  Speaker 2: trying to change the law to make it sexual assault.
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: Yes.
• 30:25
  Speaker 2: Which is, like, here's the issue, okay? They're trying to make,
• 30:30
  Speaker 2: change the law to make this situation sexual assault. So
• 30:33
  Speaker 2: that if a woman has, and they say, oh, incapacitation. No,
• 30:38
  Speaker 2: that's not, that's already in law.
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 30:41
  Speaker 2: It's already illegal to have sex with an unconscious woman. Okay?
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: I don't know if you guys know that. But it
• 30:48
  Speaker 2: is already in New York illegal. What they're trying to
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: make illegal is having sex with a woman who is
• 30:54
  Speaker 2: at all incapacitated by drugs or alcohol. I don't know
• 30:58
  Speaker 2: where they're going to draw the line.
• 30:59
  Speaker 1: Well, if you are as a man also drunk or
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: on drugs, then that's what they're trying to do is
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: basically eliminate that standard for the man and just keep
• 31:09
  Speaker 1: it for the woman.
• 31:11
  Speaker 2: Yeah, no, it'll still, you know... Yeah. I mean, still,
• 31:14
  Speaker 2: it's still... Basically, it's legal to rape men, period.
• 31:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it is.
• 31:18
  Speaker 2: That's a non-starter. Let's be honest. Our society does not
• 31:21
  Speaker 2: protect men's sexuality from women at all. But what they
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: want to do is they want to make the standard
• 31:29
  Speaker 2: even more... Like, where you would draw the line, is it,
• 31:33
  Speaker 2: does she no longer able to consent when she's tipsy?
• 31:36
  Speaker 2: Is she no longer able to consent prior to passing out?
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: Like.
• 31:42
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's the question. They are turning something much
• 31:46
  Speaker 2: more black and white into something much more gray. And
• 31:49
  Speaker 2: I would propose that this is the general thrust of
• 31:53
  Speaker 2: feminist jurisprudence overall, which is to inch law towards making
• 32:00
  Speaker 2: every single act of heterosexual sex rape. And they're going
• 32:05
  Speaker 2: to do it with these edge cases and these gray
• 32:08
  Speaker 2: areas and These kind of things where you think, well,
• 32:11
  Speaker 2: maybe they're right. After all, these horrible, horrible fraternity brothers
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: took advantage of this poor lost lamb, and we don't
• 32:20
  Speaker 2: want that to happen, so maybe we should change the law.
• 32:23
  Speaker 2: But right now, this isn't an explicit admission that the DA,
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: Van Houten, was right. Whatever happened, it did not meet
• 32:33
  Speaker 2: the legal standard of sexual assault. Full stop. The current
• 32:37
  Speaker 2: legal standard of sexual assault. And they're proving that by
• 32:43
  Speaker 2: their behavior. Okay, so there's two open problems with the
• 32:46
  Speaker 2: proposed standard. Okay. One, it is symmetric. Well, not really.
• 32:56
  Speaker 2: We all know it's not gonna be applied to symmetric,
• 32:58
  Speaker 2: but in the world where laws are applied equally to
• 33:02
  Speaker 2: men and women, if voluntary intoxication negates capacity to consent,
• 33:07
  Speaker 2: it negates it for every intoxicated party. The one contemporaneous
• 33:12
  Speaker 2: text from a defendant has him saying he and another
• 33:14
  Speaker 2: brother were too intoxicated to shut it down and kick
• 33:16
  Speaker 2: people out before it got way out of hand. Her
• 33:20
  Speaker 2: reply was that her memory was super clouded too, and
• 33:23
  Speaker 2: they had all been heavily intoxicated. Nothing in the public
• 33:27
  Speaker 2: record establishes the men's intoxication levels relative to hers. Well,
• 33:31
  Speaker 2: I mean, they are probably equivalent, maybe worse, who knows, right? So,
• 33:40
  Speaker 2: If this is going to be here and it's going
• 33:42
  Speaker 2: to be applied symmetrically, essentially what would happen is that
• 33:46
  Speaker 2: after a sexual encounter that involved any kind of drugs
• 33:49
  Speaker 2: or alcohol, it would be a race to who goes
• 33:51
  Speaker 2: to the campus Title IX office and accuses the other first.
• 33:57
  Speaker 2: You're essentially creating a gigantic gray blob in law. I
• 34:07
  Speaker 2: can only see chaos resulting. But the other thing is
• 34:09
  Speaker 2: that all of this, again, is just changing the law
• 34:15
  Speaker 2: to reduce the window upon which women can consent to sex.
• 34:19
  Speaker 2: It can be seen as competent adults to consent to sex.
• 34:23
  Speaker 2: It is an attack on women's ability to consent to sex.
• 34:27
  Speaker 2: And likewise, it's also an attack on men's due process. But, okay. Okay.
• 34:34
  Speaker 2: So do you want to go into the next thing
• 34:36
  Speaker 2: that just, and again, this completely destroys the argument. It
• 34:39
  Speaker 2: blows the argument out of the water. Because right here,
• 34:43
  Speaker 2: we have the governor and the special prosecutor basically admitting
• 34:47
  Speaker 2: through their actions that the former DA, Van Houten, is
• 34:51
  Speaker 2: he a former DA? Well, the DA, Van Houten, was
• 34:53
  Speaker 2: correct when he dismissed the law or the case on
• 34:57
  Speaker 2: the facts because they did not fit the legal standard
• 35:01
  Speaker 2: of sexual assault under New York law. Like you only
• 35:04
  Speaker 2: change the law if the law was correctly applied and
• 35:08
  Speaker 2: you didn't get the outcome you wanted. Okay, so the
• 35:13
  Speaker 2: other big controversy, and this is one of the things
• 35:15
  Speaker 2: that blows their argument out of the water. The other
• 35:17
  Speaker 2: big controversy is the whole thing about the DA not
• 35:22
  Speaker 2: receiving or not accepting or whatever, not getting the transcript.
• 35:27
  Speaker 2: So Jane Doe was questioned by the Cornell police And
• 35:33
  Speaker 2: the transcript of that questioning has become a point of
• 35:36
  Speaker 2: contention because apparently it wasn't received by the DA, but
• 35:41
  Speaker 2: there's also contention over maybe it was, maybe it wasn't.
• 35:44
  Speaker 2: I believe that's where we're at. And that transcript is
• 35:49
  Speaker 2: a smoking gun that proves that she was sexually assaulted.
• 35:55
  Speaker 2: Except there are a few things that cut against that.
• 35:58
  Speaker 2: First of all, while it does contain the 100% I
• 36:01
  Speaker 2: feel like I was raped, it also contains the, was
• 36:05
  Speaker 2: that a no or were you tired? And she said,
• 36:08
  Speaker 2: I felt tired. So it contains something that really cuts
• 36:14
  Speaker 2: against her very hard. All right.
• 36:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 36:19
  Speaker 2: The investigator documented her account, read it back. But let's
• 36:22
  Speaker 2: look at the process of the creation of the affidavit
• 36:26
  Speaker 2: that she signed and went to the DA. The investigator
• 36:29
  Speaker 2: documented her account, read it back, and asked her to
• 36:32
  Speaker 2: clarify or correct it. The investigator warned her in advance
• 36:35
  Speaker 2: that his questions might sound accusatory, explaining that he needed
• 36:38
  Speaker 2: specific answers to determine the right charges. On day two,
• 36:41
  Speaker 2: she reviewed the revised six-page statement. Her advisor asked whether
• 36:45
  Speaker 2: she wanted her and a second advisor to review it
• 36:48
  Speaker 2: as well. Before signing, she said, I'm very confident about this.
• 36:53
  Speaker 2: She was not handed a document to sign. She watched
• 36:56
  Speaker 2: it being built, was invited to correct it, had advisors available,
• 36:59
  Speaker 2: read the final version and affirmed it. And the transcript
• 37:02
  Speaker 2: contains the single most defense favorable exchange in the entire record.
• 37:05
  Speaker 2: All right, so that's a statement about the transcript. What
• 37:10
  Speaker 2: went to the DA excluded that statement by her saying literally, no,
• 37:18
  Speaker 2: it's not, it wasn't a no, it was more like
• 37:20
  Speaker 2: I was tired, right? That was excluded from the affidavit
• 37:27
  Speaker 2: that went to the DA. That was excluded. So it
• 37:31
  Speaker 2: looks like Cornell excluded anything that wasn't really bearing on
• 37:38
  Speaker 2: the actual charge of the case, what the case hinges on,
• 37:43
  Speaker 2: which were conclusions about the legal standard, which paired with
• 37:48
  Speaker 2: her belief that rape is any sex that doesn't occur
• 37:52
  Speaker 2: without enthusiastic consent. Right? That has nothing to do with
• 37:56
  Speaker 2: the New York legal standard. They excluded that. There's no
• 38:00
  Speaker 2: reason to include it. But they also excluded her literally saying,
• 38:05
  Speaker 2: in response to the investigator asking, was this a no, no,
• 38:08
  Speaker 2: I don't want this sex, or was this I'm tired?
• 38:11
  Speaker 2: And her saying, yeah, it was just I'm tired. Right?
• 38:15
  Speaker 2: Which cuts right for the defense. And they excluded that.
• 38:20
  Speaker 2: So the whole argument that Cornell was, you know, this
• 38:24
  Speaker 2: document to make a situation to clear the men, the
• 38:29
  Speaker 2: boys involved in this. Yeah, that's not true. And furthermore,
• 38:33
  Speaker 2: she had control of the entire process of drafting or
• 38:36
  Speaker 2: most of the process of drafting this affidavit that she
• 38:39
  Speaker 2: sent to the DA. This was her document. She had
• 38:47
  Speaker 2: control over it. And if at any time she had
• 38:50
  Speaker 2: had a problem, she could have brought it up. All right,
• 38:56
  Speaker 2: so also something that's been a big thing that's being
• 39:00
  Speaker 2: made by these new, these activist politicians and lawyers is
• 39:08
  Speaker 2: the fact that Van Houten didn't interview her. The attack
• 39:13
  Speaker 2: is on the declination, or it's that the DA never
• 39:16
  Speaker 2: interviewed Jane Doe or anyone else and never requested the
• 39:19
  Speaker 2: full transcript. He answered it directly to CNN. Jane Doe
• 39:24
  Speaker 2: told us through her six-page written statement in 2024 what happened.
• 39:29
  Speaker 2: When you know that a very detailed, comprehensive account doesn't
• 39:32
  Speaker 2: establish a crime, it's not ethical for a prosecutor or
• 39:36
  Speaker 2: for the police to go out and look for or
• 39:39
  Speaker 2: cross-examine her to find evidence of a crime. So she
• 39:46
  Speaker 2: gave her statement and he's like, well, Yeah, this is
• 39:51
  Speaker 2: disgusting behavior, but no crime. Yep. Is he going to
• 39:56
  Speaker 2: go back and grill her again until she gives him
• 40:01
  Speaker 2: evidence of a crime? I mean, do we want prosecutors
• 40:07
  Speaker 2: like that? Okay, so he had her sworn account given
• 40:13
  Speaker 2: over two days of the victim advocate and her own
• 40:15
  Speaker 2: advisor present, reviewed and signed by her. His position is
• 40:19
  Speaker 2: not that he overlooked an interview. It is that fishing
• 40:21
  Speaker 2: for a chargeable version of an account that doesn't contain
• 40:24
  Speaker 2: one is improper. Okay, so this is the DA that
• 40:28
  Speaker 2: they're now gotten rid of in some capacity. A sensible
• 40:33
  Speaker 2: man is now being replaced by an activist who's going
• 40:38
  Speaker 2: to change the law to make it easier for women
• 40:41
  Speaker 2: to charge men with rape if they have a glass
• 40:44
  Speaker 2: of wine. Welcome to Canada, US. All right, there may
• 40:51
  Speaker 2: be additional evidence that we did not have possession of
• 40:54
  Speaker 2: or was never disclosed to us. All right, but it's
• 40:57
  Speaker 2: on her testimony, okay? So it doesn't matter what additional
• 41:02
  Speaker 2: evidence there was. If the testimony of the victim does
• 41:05
  Speaker 2: not establish a crime, what are you going to have
• 41:08
  Speaker 2: evidence of? Less crime? Non-crime? Like.
• 41:14
  Speaker 2: Also, OK, so and then there's also the issue that
• 41:18
  Speaker 2: Jane Doe did not know about the Snapchat messages until
• 41:21
  Speaker 2: they were leaked to her by another fraternity member who
• 41:24
  Speaker 2: was outraged by what his brothers were said to have done. OK,
• 41:27
  Speaker 2: so now we have like one of these guys like
• 41:29
  Speaker 2: passing her messages. But the thing is that even the
• 41:32
  Speaker 2: Snapchat messages, rude, derogatory, sure. Not illegal.
• 41:38
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 41:40
  Speaker 2: All right. And this is the dispute. This is the
• 41:43
  Speaker 2: coverage of the dispute over what Cornell sent. Van Houten says,
• 41:46
  Speaker 2: multiple prosecutors and criminal investigators reviewed Jane Doe's statement and
• 41:50
  Speaker 2: correctly determined the alleged facts that set forward in the
• 41:53
  Speaker 2: statements do not constitute a crime. All right, I never, okay,
• 41:59
  Speaker 2: so he didn't receive the six-page statement in a snapshot video.
• 42:02
  Speaker 2: I never saw it. I never heard it until tonight.
• 42:06
  Speaker 2: On 100% confidence, so her belief that she's 100% confident
• 42:10
  Speaker 2: she was raped because she wasn't enthusiastic, or at least
• 42:13
  Speaker 2: that's the standard she apparently has, that's a legal conclusion.
• 42:17
  Speaker 2: So it's not facts of the case that you can
• 42:20
  Speaker 2: adjudicate on. It's just somebody's legal conclusion, and everybody has
• 42:23
  Speaker 2: a legal conclusion about everything. All right, so that's the
• 42:29
  Speaker 2: second thing that collapses the defendant's case, the civil suit, okay?
• 42:34
  Speaker 2: Because they're alleging Cornell didn't give the DA the testimony,
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: the testimony that led to her affidavit that she signed,
• 42:45
  Speaker 2: that she had every opportunity to read and say, hey,
• 42:47
  Speaker 2: this doesn't include everything. Or alternatively, she could have said,
• 42:52
  Speaker 2: I want you guys to send the testimony, the record
• 42:55
  Speaker 2: of testimony as well. She didn't. How is that the
• 42:59
  Speaker 2: DA's fault? Or even Cornell's. How much responsibility do institutions
• 43:08
  Speaker 2: have to take for these women? Do they have to
• 43:11
  Speaker 2: wipe their ass? Warm their bodies? Do airplane to give
• 43:17
  Speaker 2: them their squished peas?
• 43:18
  Speaker 1: Like what?
• 43:22
  Speaker 2: All right, so here's the smoking gun. This is the
• 43:25
  Speaker 2: one that just, it's gonna make your, it's gonna put
• 43:29
  Speaker 2: your hair on fire, right? It's just gonna make you boggle.
• 43:34
  Speaker 2: about this entire situation. This is the timeline after the event.
• 43:37
  Speaker 2: All right, this is from Cornell's own Title IX files,
• 43:42
  Speaker 2: and it's reported from the New York Times. I'm just
• 43:44
  Speaker 2: compiling information based on, like, essentially there is the, I
• 43:49
  Speaker 2: think CBS, no, CBC, no, that's Canadian. One of your
• 43:55
  Speaker 2: American news networks has the leaked or the transcript, and
• 44:01
  Speaker 2: another one has the Title IX files, and they're just
• 44:04
  Speaker 2: sort of parceling them out to just, I guess, construct
• 44:08
  Speaker 2: the perfect conflagration. So this is from those documents, whatever
• 44:13
  Speaker 2: I could scrape out of the news media. All right,
• 44:17
  Speaker 2: so at about 3 a.m., 20th of October, 2024, a
• 44:18
  Speaker 2: roommate texts her. Four minutes later, she replies that she
• 44:26
  Speaker 2: doesn't know when she is going to be returning. Right?
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 44:33
  Speaker 2: And the same day, she tells her two roommates that
• 44:36
  Speaker 2: she consumed ketamine and had sex with multiple men. One
• 44:39
  Speaker 2: says she did not use rape or assault. Right? That's
• 44:43
  Speaker 2: from the Title IX files, New York Times. Later, she
• 44:47
  Speaker 2: tells a roommate, if anyone asks about this, say it
• 44:49
  Speaker 2: didn't happen. Again, Title IX files. Title IX files, New
• 44:53
  Speaker 2: York Times. In late October, so the event happened the
• 44:59
  Speaker 2: 20th of October, the 19th to the 20th, she sees
• 45:03
  Speaker 2: a post online in the Greek Life Forum about the
• 45:06
  Speaker 2: group sex. Her sorority big sister gets a text. Have
• 45:10
  Speaker 2: you heard the rumor about your little? Presumably there's some
• 45:13
  Speaker 2: kind of mentor relationship. In late October, texts, more texts. Bro,
• 45:18
  Speaker 2: everyone knows. And this is, again, the sorority sending out texts.
• 45:23
  Speaker 2: And then she says, this episode is ruining my life temporarily.
• 45:27
  Speaker 2: All she can do is sleep and cry all day.
• 45:31
  Speaker 2: Before October 31st, Chi-Fi, is it Chi-Fi, Chi-Fi?
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: I think it's Chi-Fi, Chi-Fi.
• 45:41
  Speaker 2: Chi-Fi prepares a Halloween party. And she is eager to attend.
• 45:48
  Speaker 2: So this is part of the timeline afterwards, after this situation.
• 45:55
  Speaker 2: The fraternity is going to have a Halloween party. So
• 45:59
  Speaker 2: it's October, right? You have a Halloween party. So they've
• 46:03
  Speaker 2: been planning it. One of the fraternity brothers assures her
• 46:08
  Speaker 2: that she is wanted. Shai-Fai is your house and you're
• 46:12
  Speaker 2: welcome here. relaying the view of the fraternity president, who
• 46:17
  Speaker 2: is not among the accused. So apparently he wasn't involved
• 46:20
  Speaker 2: in this at all. She says, she replies, thank you.
• 46:24
  Speaker 2: I really appreciate that. Heart emoji. I'll bring my cigs tomorrow.
• 46:30
  Speaker 2: Then the fraternity president phones her and disinvites her from
• 46:34
  Speaker 2: the Halloween party. It was for her own good, he said.
• 46:41
  Speaker 2: The president, again, was not among the accused. Hmm. Fraternity members,
• 46:46
  Speaker 2: her friends, and Doe herself all referenced this in the
• 46:50
  Speaker 2: Title IX testimony. Immediately after, she tells the fraternity brother
• 46:56
  Speaker 2: who assured her that she has a place with them,
• 46:59
  Speaker 2: I knew this was going to happen. Y'all aren't my friends.
• 47:04
  Speaker 2: Of this period, she later said, and that's kind of
• 47:07
  Speaker 2: when I came to the realization that I had been
• 47:10
  Speaker 2: gang raped.
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: Ha ha ha ha ha. Literally after they, like, I'm
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: mad at them.
• 47:18
  Speaker 2: Disinvited her.
• 47:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah, they disinvited her.
• 47:20
  Speaker 2: Per the New York Times reading of the files, she
• 47:22
  Speaker 2: appears to have concluded she was assaulted at the October party.
• 47:27
  Speaker 2: According to the New York Times. By November 3rd, the
• 47:31
  Speaker 2: 3rd of November. Okay, so I just want to zero
• 47:35
  Speaker 2: in on that. That timeline of events. Okay. If it
• 47:41
  Speaker 2: is accurate, if the New York Times is reporting accurately
• 47:44
  Speaker 2: on the transcripts of the Title IX testimony, this is
• 47:48
  Speaker 2: what appears to have happened. She had this group sex
• 47:53
  Speaker 2: experience with these fraternity brothers. Okay? Later that month, in October,
• 48:02
  Speaker 2: they were going to have a Halloween party. And while
• 48:05
  Speaker 2: one of the fraternity brothers said... You are welcome to
• 48:10
  Speaker 2: the house. And I assume that means that she's welcome
• 48:14
  Speaker 2: to go with study groups and talk and have lunch.
• 48:18
  Speaker 2: And you'll be friendly. Right? So she is welcome to
• 48:24
  Speaker 2: be in a, shall we say, non-sexual situation with them.
• 48:30
  Speaker 2: And then the fraternity president said, but we're not bringing
• 48:33
  Speaker 2: you back to the parties. Or at least this party.
• 48:37
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 48:39
  Speaker 2: That's when she concluded that they weren't her friends and
• 48:42
  Speaker 2: that she had been sexually assaulted according to the New
• 48:45
  Speaker 2: York Times What was coming out of the New York Times? I?
• 48:50
  Speaker 2: Just want people to sit with that for a second Okay,
• 48:56
  Speaker 2: just sit with that all of this seems to have
• 48:58
  Speaker 2: started When the men said no Or at least one
• 49:05
  Speaker 2: of the men said no. Presumably, if there were men
• 49:08
  Speaker 2: that were saying yes, they could have just done something privately. Right.
• 49:12
  Speaker 2: But it looks like it was a pretty unanimous no.
• 49:19
  Speaker 2: And that's when. she started cogitating on the whole, wait,
• 49:24
  Speaker 2: maybe what happened to me wasn't acceptable. When the men
• 49:28
  Speaker 2: said no, when they said, you know, I think we
• 49:31
  Speaker 2: should just be friends. Because literally, the one guy is like, yeah,
• 49:36
  Speaker 2: you can come by. You know, not when people are drinking,
• 49:40
  Speaker 2: not when you're drinking, but you can come by, you know,
• 49:44
  Speaker 2: chat with us, study with us, whatever fraternities and sorority
• 49:49
  Speaker 2: sisters do when they're not, fraternity brothers and sorority sisters
• 49:55
  Speaker 2: do when they're not destroying each other's lives, right? Just
• 50:01
  Speaker 2: the chaste stuff, Bible study, whatever. OK, but not but
• 50:06
  Speaker 2: not the partying. That's that's off limits now. OK, these,
• 50:11
  Speaker 2: of course, were two different men. But again, if the
• 50:15
  Speaker 2: fraternity brothers, if this wasn't a more universal position, I
• 50:20
  Speaker 2: would imagine she could have just found the guys who
• 50:22
  Speaker 2: were still into it and gone somewhere else. That apparently
• 50:25
  Speaker 2: didn't happen. Too bad, because maybe this would have stopped
• 50:28
  Speaker 2: this entire conflagration from happening if they just put out,
• 50:32
  Speaker 2: you know. Hey, guys.
• 50:35
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 50:35
  Speaker 2: Why didn't you just put out? I mean, seriously. Little
• 50:42
  Speaker 2: ladies got to have her gang bangs. I'm just saying
• 50:45
  Speaker 2: that this is based on what the New York Times
• 50:47
  Speaker 2: has presented. This is a very different image. And that's
• 50:51
  Speaker 2: why I was like, wow. So you found that a
• 50:53
  Speaker 2: couple of these guys were like, yeah, I'm not interested.
• 50:55
  Speaker 2: Don't touch me, please. Or whatever it was. They said
• 50:59
  Speaker 2: that she came on to them and they weren't interested. Now,
• 51:05
  Speaker 2: I don't know if that's really... I don't want to
• 51:06
  Speaker 2: get into that, oh, that's also sexual assault. Because, you know,
• 51:11
  Speaker 2: if the guy says, no, I'm not interested, and she's like, okay, no,
• 51:15
  Speaker 2: that's fine. This is a little bit different, though. Like,
• 51:18
  Speaker 2: it paints a completely different picture of this individual, Jane Doe.
• 51:24
  Speaker 2: That her animus started, according to the New York Times,
• 51:28
  Speaker 2: what they're quoting from the Title IX, her animus started...
• 51:33
  Speaker 2: When they said no. When the president said no.
• 51:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 51:38
  Speaker 2: And again, not no to, hey, you can hang out
• 51:42
  Speaker 2: with us. No to, you can't come where there's drugs
• 51:45
  Speaker 2: and booze. And hopefully not drugs, too.
• 51:49
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 51:50
  Speaker 2: Because this is supposed to be a study environment, not
• 51:53
  Speaker 2: just you go out and get blazed and screw everything.
• 51:57
  Speaker 2: You're supposed to be doing something in college to further
• 52:00
  Speaker 2: your life. Not this, but regardless. Yes, you can hang
• 52:05
  Speaker 2: out with us. No, I'm not allowing you in a
• 52:08
  Speaker 2: position where you end up screwing multiple of my fraternity brothers. Right.
• 52:17
  Speaker 2: And that's when she started to think, oh, wait, wait,
• 52:20
  Speaker 2: what happened? Was it really consensual on my part? When
• 52:25
  Speaker 2: they said no. when they shut it down. Like, what
• 52:30
  Speaker 2: is this? I'm just putting it out to the viewers.
• 52:33
  Speaker 2: What is this? What, these guys don't have the right
• 52:37
  Speaker 2: to say no to her? And again, let's trot it
• 52:41
  Speaker 2: back to what the special prosecutor and the governor, what
• 52:46
  Speaker 2: they wanna do. How would that, what they wanna do
• 52:51
  Speaker 2: fix this situation? Right? Well, you know what would have happened? Okay,
• 52:55
  Speaker 2: let's run through it with their new proposed law changes. Now,
• 52:59
  Speaker 2: it doesn't matter that she voluntarily took, drank. She voluntarily drank.
• 53:05
  Speaker 2: Now it doesn't matter. She was drunk and men had
• 53:09
  Speaker 2: sex with her. That's all that matters.
• 53:11
  Speaker 4: Okay?
• 53:12
  Speaker 2: Now let's run through this sequence of events again. Okay?
• 53:17
  Speaker 2: She has her threesome. No apparent regret after the fact. Embarrassment,
• 53:24
  Speaker 2: but why wouldn't, I guess she still has a qualm,
• 53:27
  Speaker 2: a bit of shame left. And then the fraternity president,
• 53:34
  Speaker 2: like one of the fraternity brothers says, it's fine if
• 53:36
  Speaker 2: you want to hang out with us, but the fraternity
• 53:37
  Speaker 2: president says, no more drunken orgies for you. And then
• 53:43
  Speaker 2: she says, you know what? You guys aren't my friends
• 53:47
  Speaker 2: and I think you raped me. In the context of
• 53:51
  Speaker 2: this new law, what happens to them? They go to jail.
• 53:57
  Speaker 2: And what did they do? What did any of these
• 54:00
  Speaker 2: men do?
• 54:01
  Speaker 1: They said no.
• 54:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well, they engaged in a sexual act. And then
• 54:09
  Speaker 2: when the whole thing blew up and they realized it was,
• 54:12
  Speaker 2: you know, it's a problem. And maybe they felt shame
• 54:17
  Speaker 2: over what had happened. They didn't want to do it again.
• 54:20
  Speaker 2: They said no. And now they're facing this. And in
• 54:25
  Speaker 2: this new scenario, thanks to the DA or the special
• 54:29
  Speaker 2: prosecutor and the governor, in this new scenario, they would
• 54:34
  Speaker 2: have criminal charges against them. They would be facing jail.
• 54:42
  Speaker 2: And this is what blows my mind. about women in law,
• 54:47
  Speaker 2: because they keep moving the law. They keep creating these
• 54:51
  Speaker 2: cases where a woman doesn't get what she wants and
• 54:56
  Speaker 2: trying to change the law so she does. Has anyone
• 55:01
  Speaker 2: walked through this like this? Is anyone talking about this
• 55:05
  Speaker 2: in this way, that they are empowering a woman to
• 55:10
  Speaker 2: continue to force sex on men? They are making it
• 55:17
  Speaker 2: illegal for a man to say no, effectively. I mean,
• 55:21
  Speaker 2: it's not just, you know, it doesn't matter that he
• 55:23
  Speaker 2: says no. Rape is a non-starter and women can rape men.
• 55:27
  Speaker 2: It's not illegal, right? It's going to be illegal for
• 55:30
  Speaker 2: him to say no, for him to put up a boundary. Like,
• 55:35
  Speaker 2: what is this? It's turning the law into a mess.
• 55:43
  Speaker 2: And it's all based on feelings. Well, she felt like she,
• 55:46
  Speaker 2: like literally, the special prosecutor, while she felt like she
• 55:50
  Speaker 2: was raped, apparently because she didn't have enthusiastic consent, actually, no,
• 55:54
  Speaker 2: apparently it's because they said no to her, right? She
• 55:57
  Speaker 2: felt that way. Therefore, the law should confirm her feelings.
• 56:01
  Speaker 2: Do you see this? When I go back to feminism,
• 56:05
  Speaker 2: the very beginning of feminism, this is exactly the same
• 56:08
  Speaker 2: freaking pattern. Oh, well, the Marxist feminists can't derive the
• 56:12
  Speaker 2: material benefit that men get in patriarchy. So we'll just, well,
• 56:18
  Speaker 2: screw evidence. We'll just go with our feelings, our feels,
• 56:22
  Speaker 2: what matters. Over and over again. So the world that
• 56:30
  Speaker 2: they want to construct is a world in which this happens, right?
• 56:35
  Speaker 2: These fraternity brothers do something incredibly stupid. And I'm sure
• 56:40
  Speaker 2: they all are like kicking themselves. Like, I don't even
• 56:44
  Speaker 2: know why a guy would, I mean, I do know,
• 56:46
  Speaker 2: but at this point, all you're doing is increasing your
• 56:49
  Speaker 2: odds of herpes. Why would you do this? Like, why
• 56:53
  Speaker 2: would you destroy your life for this? This mess, right?
• 56:58
  Speaker 2: I'm sure they're all feeling that right now. They want
• 57:01
  Speaker 2: to create a world in which they're all in jail.
• 57:05
  Speaker 1: And why?
• 57:06
  Speaker 2: Because they had a consensual sexual interaction While she was
• 57:11
  Speaker 2: drunk and they were drunk. And then they regretted it
• 57:15
  Speaker 2: very much, obviously. Said no. And she said, you don't
• 57:20
  Speaker 2: get to say no. I mean, this is just a characterization.
• 57:27
  Speaker 2: But it really looks like it. And here. Okay. Let's
• 57:33
  Speaker 2: move to the... So one of the accounts... And this
• 57:39
  Speaker 2: is not even like, the problem here isn't that, is
• 57:45
  Speaker 2: worse than the guys who actually took her up on this.
• 57:49
  Speaker 2: And incidentally, guys, when you start, when you are in
• 57:53
  Speaker 2: a situation like this, I want you to consider something.
• 57:58
  Speaker 2: You need to look at these women who are apparently
• 58:02
  Speaker 2: spread eagled on the bed being like, yeah, I'll take
• 58:04
  Speaker 2: all three of you. And you have to think about
• 58:06
  Speaker 2: the fact that you are putting your life in their hands.
• 58:10
  Speaker 2: You are giving them every lever over your future when
• 58:15
  Speaker 2: you touch them. Even when you're in proximity of this.
• 58:19
  Speaker 2: You are giving them the right to completely implode your future.
• 58:23
  Speaker 2: To take you from a promising career in anything and
• 58:28
  Speaker 2: put you down into basically working, I don't know, stocking
• 58:32
  Speaker 2: shelves at 7-Eleven. You are handing them your future and saying, hey,
• 58:39
  Speaker 2: do whatever you want with it. I don't care about that.
• 58:45
  Speaker 2: These boys handed this woman their future. They handed it
• 58:50
  Speaker 2: to her. And I want you to consider that the
• 58:54
  Speaker 2: morals of a woman who would go spread eagle on
• 58:58
  Speaker 2: a bed and have sex with three men, maybe you
• 59:01
  Speaker 2: don't want to hand a woman like that every lever
• 59:06
  Speaker 2: to your future. Maybe you should reconsider that. Like maybe
• 59:10
  Speaker 2: the very thing that makes her willing to do that
• 59:13
  Speaker 2: is the very reason why you should not give her
• 59:16
  Speaker 2: that power over you. And I'm just saying this because, please,
• 59:21
  Speaker 2: discernment and maybe some more self-protection instinct here. But anyway,
• 59:26
  Speaker 2: I'm going to move on to point four. So this
• 59:31
  Speaker 2: is an indication of how big this problem gets. Because
• 59:36
  Speaker 2: this is now, and we're using their names because their
• 59:40
  Speaker 2: names are everywhere now. This guy is now part of this.
• 59:44
  Speaker 2: And I'm going to tell you how he became part
• 59:47
  Speaker 2: of this. Scott Kreshumar, he was in the room five
• 59:52
  Speaker 2: minutes tops. He did not see Jane Doe naked. He
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 2: did not do drugs. He asked her if she was okay.
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 2: He says she answered, I'm good, and that she didn't
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 2: seem inebriated at all. Jane Doe alleges he snorted ketamine
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 2: off her body. His attorney, Jeremy Saland, denies it and
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 2: says a drug test did not show ketamine. CBS notes
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 2: that it has not independently reviewed the test. Have you
• 1:00:28
  Speaker 2: intimately reviewed anything, CBS? Okay, but then his lawyer says,
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 2: the process that Cornell had was absolutely biased in my
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 2: personal experience. It was biased in favor of her, not
• 1:00:41
  Speaker 2: these young boys. And I would agree with his assessment
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 2: because it looks like they took her testimony and based
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 2: just on her testimony, they evicted the entire chapter. They
• 1:00:52
  Speaker 2: suspended two of these boys. I think they.
• 1:00:55
  Speaker 2: They suspended and they also, what is the word? They
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 2: completely removed them from the campus. I forget what that
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 2: word is.
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 1: Expelled?
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 2: Expelled, yes. Thank you, Brian. They expelled them. So based
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 2: on her word, they suspended two of the boys, expelled
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 2: two of them. Two of them were already graduated, so
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 2: they couldn't do anything. And then they removed the chapter entirely.
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 2: It's gone. It's closed. I don't know. That does seem
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 2: a little bit slanted. It's like he said, she said,
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 2: but you only care about she said.
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's just she said.
• 1:01:34
  Speaker 2: Van Houten told CBS News that we don't have any indication.
• 1:01:38
  Speaker 2: Campus police at the time interviewed the seven then fraternity
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 2: brothers accused in the lawsuit. So they didn't even interview them.
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 2: There's no indication they did before doing this. Cornell University Police,
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 2: in essence, they took her report, interviewed her across two days,
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 2: drafted and witnessed her sworn statement, and forwarded six pages
• 1:02:00
  Speaker 2: to the district attorney, while the university suspended all seven
• 1:02:04
  Speaker 2: men and ultimately expelled two. On the DA's information, its
• 1:02:09
  Speaker 2: police force never questioned a single one of them. Every
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 2: account from the accused that exists in the case came
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 2: out of a Title IX proceeding, not a criminal investigation.
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 2: Cornell's former police chief, Anthony Bellamy, now deputy chief at
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 2: Ithaca Police Department, told CBS he has no comment. So
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 2: they got expelled just on her word. And why? And
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 2: why did she do this? Because they said no to her.
• 1:02:34
  Speaker 2: And this guy is getting his name dragged through the mud.
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 2: And what did he do? He probably walked in the room,
• 1:02:45
  Speaker 2: smelled something skanky, took his warm beer and left. And
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 2: that's it. That's all he did. He was just in
• 1:02:52
  Speaker 2: proximity of this bomb. And he was part of the blast.
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 2: And again, I want to go back to the special
• 1:03:00
  Speaker 2: prosecutor and the governor and how they want to change
• 1:03:04
  Speaker 2: the law. This guy's going to jail too.
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:03:07
  Speaker 2: For what? God knows what. Being in the building when
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 2: consensual sex took place while a woman was drunk. But
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 2: it doesn't matter because maybe he'll get off. But that'll
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 2: be considered a miscarriage of justice to the activists. And
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 2: they'll make sure to keep his name in the public
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 2: eye and make it his life a misery. For the
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 2: audacity of being in the building. So it's like you
• 1:03:36
  Speaker 2: don't even have to do anything as a man. You
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 2: just have to be caught in the blast radius. And again,
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 2: what is the blast radius? The blast radius is a
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 2: woman who, by all accounts, had consensual sex with multiple men,
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 2: was apparently fine with it or fine enough with it
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 2: that she wanted to go back to the site of
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 2: the crime, quote unquote crime. And when they said no,
• 1:04:04
  Speaker 2: that's when she started to think, oh, wait, was I?
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 2: All right, so let's do the swap test. And then, okay.
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 2: Let's run this with the sexes reversed. Because you know
• 1:04:24
  Speaker 2: I'm good for that. I like doing that. Because it
• 1:04:27
  Speaker 2: really opens people's eyes to what we're actually seeing. Okay,
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 2: let's do the swap test. This is number five. A
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 2: man has sex with a woman or multiple women. Afterwards,
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 2: she tells him that he isn't welcome at her next event.
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 2: He responds by continuing to contact her. making clear he
• 1:04:46
  Speaker 2: expects access, turning on her when it's refused, telling people
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 2: she assaulted him, and eventually filing a complaint naming her
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 2: and a dozen associated parties as liable for a crime.
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 2: A complainant that omits the account he, his complaint, omits
• 1:05:00
  Speaker 2: the account he gave at the time, and whose own
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 2: timeline shows the accusation arriving the week he was cut off.
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 2: I don't know, Brian, what do you think of that guy?
• 1:05:11
  Speaker 1: Sounds innocent, Allison. I don't know what you're talking about.
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 1: Sounds like he's a victim.
• 1:05:19
  Speaker 2: Nobody would hesitate. Stalking and harassment, and depending on jurisdiction
• 1:05:22
  Speaker 2: and conduct, criminal. The refusal of an escalation sequence is
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 2: the pattern. The accusation would read as the final escalation,
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 2: and his earlier neutral description of the encounter would be
• 1:05:32
  Speaker 2: treated as essentially authoritative. He was fine with it until
• 1:05:37
  Speaker 2: she said no would be the whole story. And the
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 2: institution would have an office for it. We would have
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 2: an office... in the women aren't happy, I don't know,
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 2: Department of Government, just on this kind of behavior in men.
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's not completely symmetric. He'd be pursuing the woman.
• 1:06:03
  Speaker 2: Doe was pursuing access to a group. I don't know
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 2: if that makes it better. And the accusation itself is
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 2: the escalation. The difference is a mechanism not in structure.
• 1:06:14
  Speaker 2: The trigger is her refusal either way, is the refusal
• 1:06:17
  Speaker 2: either way. The sincere reinterpretation defense, so he just, you know,
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 2: he just was so offended by her saying, let's just
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 2: be friends, right? That the sincere interpretation that he then
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 2: realized that she had taken advantage of him, And then
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 2: he was going to just not destroy her life, but
• 1:06:40
  Speaker 2: just see justice done somehow. It just wouldn't be believed.
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 2: Would anybody believe that? Like a guy has sex with
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 2: a woman. Right? A week later, he's like, I want
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 2: to do it again. And she's like, no. And then
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 2: he starts escalating with trying to contact, trying to... and
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 2: then starts to develop a legal case against her. Would
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 2: anybody extend the benefit of the doubt to this man?
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 2: Or would he be recognized for what he is? And
• 1:07:17
  Speaker 2: I'm just saying, how is Jane Doan different? Right. So anyway,
• 1:07:25
  Speaker 2: those are my five things that absolutely destroy the plaintiff's argument.
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 2: But anyway, did you want to add to that? You
• 1:07:36
  Speaker 2: said you had a lot of stuff on people's reactions.
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I have some other stuff. I'll just say that
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 1: Kathy Hochul should probably... I think the thing that would
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 1: be better than trying to close loopholes is to close
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 1: down loopy hoes. But anyway, I got a bunch of
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 1: super comments. You gotta close legs, don't close loopholes. Um,
• 1:08:03
  Speaker 1: I got some super comments and then we're going to, uh, uh,
• 1:08:07
  Speaker 1: I got like some reactions from people, some commentary, some
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 1: peanut gallery thoughts, but go on. Yep.
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Before we go into it, this is a civil
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 2: suit guys. This is not justice for anybody who's been raped. Right.
• 1:08:22
  Speaker 2: I mean, I would probably not even talk about this
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 2: or I would talk about it. Maybe we do a
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 2: new show segment on it. If, what was ending in
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 2: this is an actual like prosecution for, for criminal charges.
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 2: I wouldn't want to see it based on this evidence,
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 2: but at the very least it would be trying to say,
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 2: like you could say it was motivated by justice, a
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 2: twisted kind of justice, but this isn't that this is
• 1:08:52
  Speaker 2: a civil suit. Okay. Yeah.
• 1:08:56
  Speaker 1: I just wanted to.
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 2: Point that out.
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 1: That's true. But I mean, like, the case, well, all
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 1: I can do is speculate. But what I was going
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 1: to say is, this is just the online conversation. In
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 1: terms of actual, like, convictions and all that, the case
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 1: is going to play out however it plays out. It
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 1: doesn't look good for the plaintiff, the woman. It doesn't
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 1: look good for her. But that doesn't matter now because
• 1:09:30
  Speaker 1: it's become the new circus, the new current thing that
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 1: women are all rallying around. And so my interest in
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 1: the case has more to do with the reaction of
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 1: the case and the case itself, just like the Lindsay
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 1: Clancy thing. I mean, look, it's going to play out
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 1: however it plays out. Is there a chance that Lindsay
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 1: Clancy goes free? Yes. If she does, then it's a story.
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 1: But the story really is people's reaction. It's like looking
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 1: at the hive mind go crazy, the female hive mind online.
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 1: That's the story, in my opinion. The same thing is
• 1:10:06
  Speaker 1: true with this. And it just shows how susceptible these
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 1: women are to, I guess you could say, the conversation
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 1: or the propaganda that's floating around. But I'm going to
• 1:10:18
  Speaker 1: read some Super Childs and then I will look at
• 1:10:19
  Speaker 1: some of it because I think that is what's happening.
• 1:10:22
  Speaker 1: I think that most of these people that are outraged
• 1:10:27
  Speaker 1: at the Cornell 7 are people who did not look
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 1: at the case, have no interest in the case, and
• 1:10:33
  Speaker 1: only see this as a thing to signal about, to
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 1: signal to the relational web about, with other women to
• 1:10:42
  Speaker 1: figure out who are the friends and who are the enemies,
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: who are the allies and who are not. And that's
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: all it's about. It's not about the truth at all,
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 1: I don't think. But anyway, I got a super chow
• 1:10:54
  Speaker 1: from Richard B. Ayer at the top of the show.
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 1: He gave us $ 5 and said, This sounds too similar
• 1:11:00
  Speaker 1: to an account that Hannah has mentioned before. A consensual
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 1: at the time encounter that the roommate of the one
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 1: involved convinced the one involved that it wasn't consensual. That
• 1:11:11
  Speaker 1: one ended because of the spread of various rhetoric in
• 1:11:14
  Speaker 1: a mob visiting the male and dragging him out of
• 1:11:17
  Speaker 1: his residence. He was beaten until no longer breathing. Someone
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 1: brought gasoline and doused his remains and lit it up.
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 1: After the fire burned out and everyone was cleaning up
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 1: and getting ready to go home, she then declared that
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 1: the encounter wasn't rape at all. The medical examiner found
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 1: a boot print embedded in his skull. And look, this happens.
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 1: I think a lot of lynchings happen this way. Again,
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 1: we talked about the witch trials being a lot of
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 1: this kind of thing. But there's also, you don't have
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 1: to go that far back. Brock Turner, there's a lot
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 1: of people who still believe Brock Turner is 100% guilty
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 1: and should hang. There's the Duke Lacrosse. There is the
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 1: one that the Rolling Stone reported on. I don't think
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 1: it was the Duke Lacrosse, but it was a similar case.
• 1:12:05
  Speaker 1: Mattress Girl? Mattress Girl, Emma Sulkowicz, I was just going
• 1:12:07
  Speaker 1: to mention her. And this is just like, in all
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 1: of these cases, the normies, the normie women or whatever,
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 1: they're probably all on the side of the supposed victims.
• 1:12:20
  Speaker 1: So this is just another for that. It's more chum
• 1:12:24
  Speaker 1: in the water for the sharks. And no amount of
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 1: rationalizing is going to change that because these women have
• 1:12:32
  Speaker 1: made up their minds. I mean, Granted, I just want
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 1: the men to be safe, and if they're innocent, then
• 1:12:38
  Speaker 1: they should go free, and it doesn't look like they
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 1: did anything not consensual. With regards to the behavior, I
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 1: think it's really stupid, and I think it's stupid because
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 1: it will get you in trouble like what has happened, right?
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 1: And I saw the girl. Apparently, her photos or whoever
• 1:12:56
  Speaker 1: she is has leaked online. I mean, not that it
• 1:12:59
  Speaker 1: matters because all the men's identities are out there, too.
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 1: And she is astonishingly mid. So that's another thing. Guys,
• 1:13:07
  Speaker 1: it's not worth it. Like, really, this is just unwise.
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 1: That's all I'm saying. Protect yourself, but don't get involved
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 1: with this shit. It's dangerous.
• 1:13:16
  Speaker 2: Okay. Can I just say, I don't think it's worth
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 2: it regardless of what she looks like.
• 1:13:21
  Speaker 1: No, I know. I know. I wasn't saying it because
• 1:13:24
  Speaker 1: of that. I was saying, you know, at the end
• 1:13:25
  Speaker 1: of the day, it's not worth it.
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 2: You know, well, that makes it, that makes it slightly
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 2: less worth it.
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 1: She's not exactly an enchantress is what I'm saying too. Like,
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 1: you know, why would you, you know.
• 1:13:36
  Speaker 2: What, what confuses me is, and now that I, I
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 2: actually am really questioning the entirety of her testimony just
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 2: because of that one detail that when they said no
• 1:13:49
  Speaker 2: is when all of the, I guess the intrusive thoughts
• 1:13:52
  Speaker 2: came into her head. Um, So I'm actually questioning how
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 2: many men were interested and got involved. But when I
• 1:14:03
  Speaker 2: was originally reading this, I'm like, okay, so you're saying
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 2: this is eight men to one woman? Why don't you
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 2: just skip the woman and go straight to the gay orgy?
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 2: At what point do you just.
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 1: Look, I said I don't get it. Maybe, like, I
• 1:14:16
  Speaker 1: just don't think it's smart. I just think it's, you know,
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 1: just a bad idea.
• 1:14:21
  Speaker 2: It's not.
• 1:14:21
  Speaker 1: And it's not even really just because of the fact
• 1:14:24
  Speaker 1: that you could get accused of rape afterwards, which is
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 1: what happened, because you upset her. That's all it is.
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 1: But it's also because it's just kind of gross. Like,
• 1:14:33
  Speaker 1: do you really want... Like, I don't see... I don't know.
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 1: Maybe my libido ain't what it used to be, but
• 1:14:39
  Speaker 1: I don't see anything drawing me into that. But it happened, right?
• 1:14:44
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but the other thing is that, again, it doesn't
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 2: sound like... When we finally get their side of the story,
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 2: it doesn't sound like it's as clear cut as them
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 2: pressuring her into anything. Who knows? Maybe she was pressuring them.
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 2: I mean, we don't know. It's a he said, she
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 2: said situation.
• 1:15:07
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a he said, she said.
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 2: And we already have evidence from, I think, two of
• 1:15:12
  Speaker 2: them that she was the aggressor.
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 1: Yeah, two.
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:15:18
  Speaker 1: Well, at least they're still claiming it. So, yeah.
• 1:15:21
  Speaker 2: The other issue I have is this is like a
• 1:15:23
  Speaker 2: lot like I'm like looking and this is just my
• 1:15:26
  Speaker 2: personal opinion and speculation. So don't treat this as some
• 1:15:30
  Speaker 2: kind of like fact, but I'm looking at her behavior.
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 2: And if she was a man who engaged in this
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 2: kind of behavior and and I only use that because
• 1:15:39
  Speaker 2: it makes it clearer.
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 2: This is the kind of behavior that a man would
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 2: engage you in. And I would immediately say I'm not
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 2: going anywhere near him. Just this whole resentment over the
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 2: word no. Yeah. And then this maximal escalation of harming
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 2: another person because they said no. Like, that's some serious
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 2: red flags. I don't... And if she's excusing it to herself, like, oh, well,
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 2: they showed me that they weren't my friends. But they didn't. Like,
• 1:16:12
  Speaker 2: apparently the house was still open to her. There's no
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 2: indication she was excluded from going over and talking to
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 2: them and hanging out with them. She was just excluded
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 2: from the party. And the party is the site of
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 2: sexual access. Everybody knows why the fraternity president would exclude
• 1:16:28
  Speaker 2: her from the party. Is anybody confused about that? Brian,
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 2: are you confused about that?
• 1:16:33
  Speaker 1: No, I'm not confused by that.
• 1:16:36
  Speaker 2: Yeah, she's being excluded because she brings that element to
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 2: the party. And they don't want to, and again, he
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 2: said it for your own good. It's probably not a
• 1:16:46
  Speaker 2: good idea to continue to create this situation where things
• 1:16:50
  Speaker 2: get out of hand, right? So the reason why she's
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 2: being excluded from that party is because the sexual tap
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 2: is being cut off for her. And then that's what
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 2: makes her go ballistic. That's a huge red flag. And again,
• 1:17:06
  Speaker 2: if that was a man, a man who thought that way, yeah,
• 1:17:10
  Speaker 2: I wouldn't want to be around him. I would be
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 2: quietly figuring out how to make his presence in my
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 2: life as minimal as possible. Okay? And that's her behavior.
• 1:17:21
  Speaker 2: It is, in my opinion, predatory. So when you said,
• 1:17:27
  Speaker 2: oh yeah, there was testimony of these guys, of her
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 2: sort of not.
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 1: Being the aggressor.
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 2: Being the aggressor. Again, based on that testimony, I can't
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 2: say that she was sexually assaulting them. Even though I
• 1:17:43
  Speaker 2: think they said it, but being the aggressor, I was
• 1:17:47
  Speaker 2: not surprised. Just based on the sequence of events and
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 2: how her mind apparently works. All right, so do you
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 2: want to continue with the.
• 1:17:56
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I got more Super Chow. So Super Chow time
• 1:18:00
  Speaker 1: gives us $ 5 and says, gets rejected. You raped me, lol.
• 1:18:05
  Speaker 1: And then Dark Kiki Mora, I'm afraid I might sneeze here.
• 1:18:10
  Speaker 1: Gives us $ 20 and says, I've had a mind-blowing thought before.
• 1:18:13
  Speaker 1: If you were to look at the situation like an
• 1:18:15
  Speaker 1: adult younger brother incestuously attracted to an older one, and
• 1:18:23
  Speaker 1: that younger brother set up a situation where they were
• 1:18:25
  Speaker 1: both equally drunk, you might actually say that's dicey consent
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 1: for the older one, even though it involves equal drunkenness.
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 1: It's just that logic would actually mean to me... Let
• 1:18:37
  Speaker 1: me finish the superchild. It's just that logic would actually
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 1: mean to me feminists are making a dozen more fucked
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 1: up assumptions about men and women when they assume equally
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 1: inebriated heterosexual people fucking is always a case of the
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 1: man raping the woman okay.
• 1:18:51
  Speaker 2: Okay dark kiki mora you gotta you gotta put down
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 2: the supernatural slash fiction.
• 1:18:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah i don't get the uh why did we have
• 1:19:00
  Speaker 1: to get into incest like that has nothing to do
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 1: with any of this like i don't.
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 2: Understand No, it doesn't really. I think it's just that
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 2: he has to go with the most edgy possible. I, okay.
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 1: Well, all right. Yeah. I got a, I got a
• 1:19:14
  Speaker 1: super chat from, uh, Xeranks for, uh, five. And he says,
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 1: I think we can get on the same page and
• 1:19:20
  Speaker 1: see Hocal's suggestion as reasonable. If we determine GN Gomeshi
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 1: was one of the accused. Okay. Albatross gives us $ 2
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 1: and says she wanted revenge for getting friend zone. Yes, obviously.
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 1: But thank you for that nonetheless.
• 1:19:38
  Speaker 2: It's not, it's, I guess you could, there's room for,
• 1:19:42
  Speaker 2: I mean, we don't know her intent.
• 1:19:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:19:44
  Speaker 2: We can only speculate on.
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 1: It just looks that way.
• 1:19:47
  Speaker 2: It just is really sleazy.
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:19:51
  Speaker 2: Right. If that was the, if that was the pivot
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 2: point between, oh, I'm fine with it. And no, I'm,
• 1:19:57
  Speaker 2: I'm going to make these, these young men's lives hell.
• 1:20:00
  Speaker 2: That was the pivot point was them saying, no, that's a, that's,
• 1:20:05
  Speaker 2: It's got a really kind of a slimy quality to it.
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 1: You know?
• 1:20:10
  Speaker 2: Anyway.
• 1:20:11
  Speaker 1: Yeah, for sure. Well, you know, you can't shame the
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 1: people who have no shame. But you can't blame anybody
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 1: for that except the person.
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 2: So....
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 1: No, honestly... Yeah, go ahead.
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 2: Brian, you sound so defeated.
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 1: It's all right.
• 1:20:43
  Speaker 2: Okay. Honestly, the worst part of what she did was
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 2: that she had sex with these guys and then she
• 1:20:51
  Speaker 2: betrayed them utterly. Mm-hmm. Like, do you... Like, I don't
• 1:20:56
  Speaker 2: understand this. Don't you have any kind of sense of
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 2: something towards your sexual partners?
• 1:21:03
  Speaker 1: I mean, she... She did a gangbang with seven dudes.
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 1: I don't think she has anything in mind except her own...
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 1: Or whatever it was. A large number of dudes. At
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 1: least three. My point is she only saw this as
• 1:21:19
  Speaker 1: something that she was going to enjoy. She wasn't thinking
• 1:21:21
  Speaker 1: about them at all. They were simply a means to
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 1: an end. I mean, what else could it be? It's
• 1:21:28
  Speaker 1: not like she... Do you think she likes those guys?
• 1:21:31
  Speaker 1: Maybe enough to let them touch her with their pee-pees, but, like,
• 1:21:36
  Speaker 1: I don't think that there was, like, anything, any deep
• 1:21:40
  Speaker 1: connection there.
• 1:21:41
  Speaker 2: Well, I know there's no, well, but the thing is
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 2: that they, I mean, if she's going over to their house,
• 1:21:47
  Speaker 2: obviously she's hanging out with them to some capacity, right?
• 1:21:50
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:21:50
  Speaker 2: She's, like, saying that they're her friends.
• 1:21:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah, sure. Yeah.
• 1:21:56
  Speaker 2: Well, I guess what she means by friends is they're
• 1:21:57
  Speaker 2: her sexual conveniences.
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 1: Right, her fuck buddies.
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:22:02
  Speaker 1: I mean, that's what I mean.
• 1:22:02
  Speaker 2: Well, not even buddies. Like, fuck sticks.
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah, like her... Fuck acquaintances.
• 1:22:11
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but acquaintance would suggest a recognition of person. This
• 1:22:17
  Speaker 2: is totally dehumanizing. Because it's one thing, again, to be so,
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 2: you know, like, engage in the gangbang in the first place.
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 2: But then to not even... Like, not even develop any
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 2: kind of sense of responsibility... For the people you've allowed
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 2: to have inside you. Right? That doesn't even occur to you.
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 2: That maybe you should care about them a little bit.
• 1:22:39
  Speaker 2: I'm not saying you have to marry all five of
• 1:22:42
  Speaker 2: them or whatever. But maybe just not put them through
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 2: hell and destroy their lives for telling you no? I
• 1:22:50
  Speaker 2: don't know. I'm just saying the sex is off-putting but
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 2: the betrayal is disgusting.
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 1: Anyway. I think that's all of the super chats and stuff.
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 1: I'm just double checking to make sure.
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 2: I do have a thank you.
• 1:23:11
  Speaker 1: Okay, good. Excellent. All right.
• 1:23:15
  Speaker 2: So I'm going to just double check to make sure
• 1:23:17
  Speaker 2: how they want to be respond, how they want to
• 1:23:20
  Speaker 2: be addressed. Anonymous gives us $ 50. Thank you, Anonymous.
• 1:23:24
  Speaker 1: Thank you.
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 2: Good news, everyone. Yeah. So we are now at $ 1, 200.
• 1:23:31
  Speaker 2: For the month remaining. And if you would like to
• 1:23:34
  Speaker 2: put me out of my misery. And also make me
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 2: feel like this... It's a good feeling when people care
• 1:23:41
  Speaker 2: about these things. Because I think they're important. I'm pretty
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 2: sure nobody has talked about this angle. Right? And it
• 1:23:49
  Speaker 2: really is a devastating angle for the defense. This woman... Decided...
• 1:23:56
  Speaker 2: Or started to think... that she was sexually assaulted after
• 1:24:01
  Speaker 2: the man, the president, said no more. No more engaging
• 1:24:07
  Speaker 2: in this. We're not giving you access to our parties,
• 1:24:09
  Speaker 2: or at least this party. Cool your jets, lady. And
• 1:24:14
  Speaker 2: that's when she started to think, oh, hey, maybe I
• 1:24:19
  Speaker 2: was sexually assaulted. This is really damning. Tell me in
• 1:24:24
  Speaker 2: the comments if anybody else is pointing this out. pointing
• 1:24:28
  Speaker 2: this particularly out or even saying maybe the horrible thing
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 2: is that she is actually not respecting their consent. Anybody
• 1:24:42
  Speaker 2: else pointing this out and how devastating that is to
• 1:24:45
  Speaker 2: the defense? Well, this is the men's rights in the
• 1:24:48
  Speaker 2: men's issues point of view. You actually walk through it
• 1:24:51
  Speaker 2: and say, well, where are men's vulnerabilities here? Where were
• 1:24:55
  Speaker 2: men actually had their consent contravened? And then this stuff
• 1:25:00
  Speaker 2: pops out. And again, this is devastating for the defense.
• 1:25:04
  Speaker 2: And this is the kind of analysis that we bring.
• 1:25:06
  Speaker 2: And if you want to support it, feedthebadger.com slash support.
• 1:25:10
  Speaker 2: Another big thank you to Anonymous for putting $ 50 through.
• 1:25:14
  Speaker 2: Any bit helps, $ 5, $ 10. It's just nice to know
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 2: that I've reached somebody and they realize that this is important,
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 2: that this is an important perspective to have. We have
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 2: to actually care about men and we have to be
• 1:25:28
  Speaker 2: concerned about how the law affects them and how women's
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 2: actions affect them. And maybe, maybe just someday we will
• 1:25:36
  Speaker 2: actually judge women's actions based on how they affect men.
• 1:25:40
  Speaker 2: You know, this is our perspective. We do this daily,
• 1:25:44
  Speaker 2: every week, almost daily. And if you want to support that,
• 1:25:48
  Speaker 2: Because it's not supported anywhere. There's no institutional support for this.
• 1:25:51
  Speaker 2: No corporate sponsorship. We don't even get advertising revenue because
• 1:25:55
  Speaker 2: we've been demonetized. Probably because we've refused to sanitize our
• 1:26:00
  Speaker 2: speech in part. And also because we're on a bunch
• 1:26:04
  Speaker 2: of alphabet lists and feminists periodically tell YouTube to de-boost
• 1:26:08
  Speaker 2: us in the algorithm. And I have all of this
• 1:26:10
  Speaker 2: in writing. So we are not institutionally supported. We are
• 1:26:13
  Speaker 2: supported entirely by our viewers. You listening to me now.
• 1:26:17
  Speaker 2: And if you've never heard anybody talk about this, and
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 2: you don't want the conversation to stop, this side of
• 1:26:23
  Speaker 2: the conversation, then go to feedthebadger.com slash support. It's the
• 1:26:27
  Speaker 2: only way to keep continuing it. And again, big thank
• 1:26:31
  Speaker 2: you to Anonymous for $ 50. And also Richard Beer. He
• 1:26:34
  Speaker 2: put in $ 250 before the show started.
• 1:26:36
  Speaker 1: Oh, nice. Thank you. Yeah, just like a woman.
• 1:26:42
  Speaker 2: Except Richard isn't.
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 1: No, I know, but he likes that. I think he
• 1:26:45
  Speaker 1: likes that sound, so. I could have played the John
• 1:26:49
  Speaker 1: Cena thing instead, but it's fine.
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 1: All right. So I got another super chow. No, rumble rant. Sorry.
• 1:26:58
  Speaker 1: Rumble rant from Nova or OIC. And he says, shout
• 1:27:02
  Speaker 1: out to Nova fan. His first rumble rant was missed. Oh,
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 1: I got to go back a ways. Thank you. Nova
• 1:27:08
  Speaker 1: fan gives a dollar earlier earlier and says, feminists, why
• 1:27:11
  Speaker 1: do men not believe us when we give consent? We're
• 1:27:14
  Speaker 1: trustworthy and responsible just like men. Feminist even when she
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 1: gives consent. I don't care what the law says. Men guilty. Yes.
• 1:27:22
  Speaker 1: Of course. All right. So I got some reactions to
• 1:27:28
  Speaker 1: this that we could go through really quick. So as
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 1: you know, Kathy Hochul, who is the New York governor,
• 1:27:38
  Speaker 1: called the allegations, quote, nothing short of horrifying. And utterly unspeakable.
• 1:27:45
  Speaker 1: She said the accuser was failed by a people and
• 1:27:49
  Speaker 1: institutions with an obligation to protect her at every turn.
• 1:27:54
  Speaker 1: Campus police committed, um, omitted language like the explicit, I
• 1:27:58
  Speaker 1: was raped claim from the summary sent to prosecutors. The
• 1:28:02
  Speaker 1: local DA did not interview her. Uh, she lost faith
• 1:28:05
  Speaker 1: in Tompkins County DA, Matthew Van Hooten. Uh, appointed AG
• 1:28:09
  Speaker 1: Letitia James as special prosecutor, pushed for an independent university review,
• 1:28:15
  Speaker 1: which Cornell has agreed to, and called for legislative changes
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 1: to close the voluntary intoxication distinction and consent laws, which
• 1:28:24
  Speaker 1: we sort of talked about a little bit already. So yeah,
• 1:28:27
  Speaker 1: so Kathy Hochul is basically using this to score. This
• 1:28:30
  Speaker 1: is like scoring political points, right? That's really what it is.
• 1:28:33
  Speaker 1: I mean, yeah, they're going to try and change some
• 1:28:36
  Speaker 1: laws or whatever, and I i don't know that it's
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 1: going to happen but it might um but it doesn't
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 1: matter because the point of it is to like be
• 1:28:43
  Speaker 1: seen saying these things and then it doesn't matter if
• 1:28:46
  Speaker 1: you get it done or not because if you do
• 1:28:48
  Speaker 1: get it done then guess what you know uh the
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 1: justice system becomes a bigger joke than it already is
• 1:28:54
  Speaker 1: and if it doesn't go through then you get to
• 1:28:56
  Speaker 1: say look at how sexist the justice system is And
• 1:28:59
  Speaker 1: you'll get female support regardless. So... Okay. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
• 1:29:08
  Speaker 1: Democrat from New York, at a Students vs. Billionaires town
• 1:29:11
  Speaker 1: hall in Ithaca, decried a culture of rape and sexual
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 1: assault slash pedophilia. So now she takes it a step further.
• 1:29:20
  Speaker 1: Protected in elite institutions like Cornell. And I actually have
• 1:29:24
  Speaker 1: a video of that that we can look at.
• 1:29:26
  Speaker 2: So.
• 1:29:28
  Speaker 3: I want to be clear.
• 1:29:30
  Speaker 1: You got to get in there so you can see it.
• 1:29:31
  Speaker 1: This is like two minutes long. Get in there.
• 1:29:38
  Speaker 2: Okay. I got it.
• 1:29:40
  Speaker 1: Are you? I don't hear it. Yeah, I'm in there.
• 1:29:42
  Speaker 1: I'm in there.
• 1:29:43
  Speaker 2: I'm in there.
• 1:29:44
  Speaker 1: Now you're in. Okay. Okay. All right. Here we go.
• 1:29:46
  Speaker 2: I want to be clear.
• 1:29:49
  Speaker 3: That the culture of rape, sexual assault, and pedophilia is
• 1:29:56
  Speaker 3: is protected in elite institutions across the United States and
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 3: including Cornell University in this instance.
• 1:30:03
  Speaker 4: During a town hall hosted by More Perfect University.
• 1:30:06
  Speaker 1: All right, I just, that was basically, I mean, there's more.
• 1:30:10
  Speaker 1: She tells like some personal anecdote about when she was
• 1:30:12
  Speaker 1: in college. But it's all like to basically, like I said,
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 1: she's trying to get.
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 2: No, we can, I just wanted to say, again, Cornell
• 1:30:21
  Speaker 2: expelled five of them. Yeah. or suspended all seven, expelled two.
• 1:30:29
  Speaker 2: I think they continued an expansion, two of them. And
• 1:30:34
  Speaker 2: they completely shut down the chapter, apparently just based on
• 1:30:38
  Speaker 2: her testimony, which then they took her testimony for several days,
• 1:30:46
  Speaker 2: worked with her to create an affidavit to send to
• 1:30:49
  Speaker 2: the DA. They excluded evidence in her own testimony. that
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 2: she had given or that her concept of consent was
• 1:31:00
  Speaker 2: not saying no, but being tired, not being enthusiastic. And
• 1:31:05
  Speaker 2: they excluded that. And they sent that with her consent
• 1:31:11
  Speaker 2: to the DA. The DA looked at it and said,
• 1:31:13
  Speaker 2: there's nothing actionable under New York law, which is confirmed
• 1:31:18
  Speaker 2: by the governor saying they're going to change the law.
• 1:31:22
  Speaker 2: And then we have AOC saying that institutions failed. You
• 1:31:26
  Speaker 2: mean what? Western jurisprudence failed women because it didn't give
• 1:31:31
  Speaker 2: this woman what she wanted, which is apparently for these
• 1:31:34
  Speaker 2: men to go to jail because they said no to her.
• 1:31:37
  Speaker 2: I mean, I guess we can't for sure see this
• 1:31:43
  Speaker 2: as vindictive. Like, I mean, they say no. And then
• 1:31:47
  Speaker 2: she's like, you know, I feel like I've been raped.
• 1:31:49
  Speaker 2: I'm going to start the process of accusation. I mean,
• 1:31:53
  Speaker 2: we can't say for sure that it's inspired by vindictive behavior,
• 1:31:58
  Speaker 2: but it's really suggestive. The sequence of events is very suggestive,
• 1:32:05
  Speaker 2: shall we say. But it's also suggestive that no matter what,
• 1:32:09
  Speaker 2: they didn't do anything wrong. And they want to change
• 1:32:14
  Speaker 2: the law to make it so this woman has a
• 1:32:17
  Speaker 2: fast track to completely ruining these men's lives. Not even
• 1:32:20
  Speaker 2: more than she already has. Because they said no to her.
• 1:32:26
  Speaker 2: That's what we're seeing right now. Like, it's horrifying. Yes,
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 2: you're right. It is horrifying. Okay, let's keep going.
• 1:32:37
  Speaker 1: Well, that's... Okay, so that was AOC. I mean, I
• 1:32:40
  Speaker 1: could play more of it.
• 1:32:41
  Speaker 4: And other groups... Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez spoke directly to students
• 1:32:47
  Speaker 4: about an alleged gang rape in October 2024 at Cornell
• 1:32:50
  Speaker 4: University in Ithaca, New York. Tompkins County prosecutors have reopened
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 4: the probe in which a former student claimed in a
• 1:32:56
  Speaker 4: civil complaint that she was drugged and sexually assaulted by
• 1:32:59
  Speaker 4: seven members of the Chi Phi fraternity.
• 1:33:02
  Speaker 1: The reopening of the probe, by the way, is also
• 1:33:06
  Speaker 1: a justification for these people just treating these allegations like
• 1:33:10
  Speaker 1: they're just true. But go ahead.
• 1:33:12
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:33:12
  Speaker 1: What were you going to say?
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 2: Yeah. See how the, you know, the one dude that
• 1:33:16
  Speaker 2: just sort of walked in the room and then left
• 1:33:18
  Speaker 2: is now part of that, part of the seven. Like two,
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 2: two of these guys were just basically in that situation.
• 1:33:24
  Speaker 2: And then I think the other couple of them were
• 1:33:26
  Speaker 2: also the ones you talked about who testified. Yeah. Right.
• 1:33:31
  Speaker 2: Who said that she was the aggressor and that didn't,
• 1:33:34
  Speaker 2: nothing happened.
• 1:33:35
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:33:35
  Speaker 2: And then, so now we're down to, we got four
• 1:33:39
  Speaker 2: and the three, three of them had sex with her.
• 1:33:42
  Speaker 2: apparently okay and one of the dudes who just walked
• 1:33:49
  Speaker 2: in and then walked out actually asked her hey are
• 1:33:51
  Speaker 2: you okay and she said i'm fine and she didn't
• 1:33:55
  Speaker 2: seem drunk at that time right so four of these
• 1:33:58
  Speaker 2: guys likely had nothing to do with this this alleged
• 1:34:03
  Speaker 2: gang rape but guess what they were in the building
• 1:34:06
  Speaker 2: they walked into the room They had the audacity to
• 1:34:10
  Speaker 2: have this woman come on to them, and now they're
• 1:34:12
  Speaker 2: part of it. Okay, now they're part of it. Now
• 1:34:16
  Speaker 2: they're in the blast radius. It is disgusting. My husband
• 1:34:23
  Speaker 2: just said this is disgusting, and it is disgusting.
• 1:34:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it is.
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 2: Okay, let's keep going.
• 1:34:30
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 1:34:32
  Speaker 4: Jane Doe's attorney said Cornell expelled two of the seven
• 1:34:35
  Speaker 4: accused students while the others received lesser punishments. including suspensions, workshops,
• 1:34:40
  Speaker 4: or written assignments. Cornell countered that claim Monday, saying there
• 1:34:44
  Speaker 4: was a range of sanctions for the accused students, including
• 1:34:46
  Speaker 4: suspensions and expulsions. But, quote, none of the individuals charged
• 1:34:50
  Speaker 4: were offered the opportunity to write essays as a sole
• 1:34:53
  Speaker 4: consequence of their involvement. AOC told the crowd about being touched.
• 1:34:57
  Speaker 2: In a program. Their involvement. One dude just walks, two
• 1:35:02
  Speaker 2: of them just walked in the fucking room. Two of
• 1:35:06
  Speaker 2: them were themselves allegedly sexually assaulted by this woman. And
• 1:35:12
  Speaker 2: then three of them apparently had at least sex with
• 1:35:17
  Speaker 2: her that she was quite willing to repeat or at
• 1:35:21
  Speaker 2: least be in the proximity of it repeating a few
• 1:35:25
  Speaker 2: weeks later. Like, I mean, I can't tell that what
• 1:35:29
  Speaker 2: she was upset about was, you know, being excluded from
• 1:35:33
  Speaker 2: the party. Right. But I mean, I don't know when
• 1:35:36
  Speaker 2: something bad happens to me, often I don't want to return.
• 1:35:39
  Speaker 2: Like my cat died and I've had trouble going back
• 1:35:43
  Speaker 2: to the badger cave because it was, I don't want
• 1:35:45
  Speaker 2: to feel like walking in and thinking, Oh, where's my cat?
• 1:35:48
  Speaker 2: And the cat boy cats gone. Right. You know, you,
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 2: you don't want to go to places that you associate
• 1:35:54
  Speaker 2: with something negative. And she got upset when she was excluded. Yeah. Um,
• 1:36:03
  Speaker 2: And it's just really unfortunate that this is, again, four
• 1:36:13
  Speaker 2: of these guys are just in the blast radius. It
• 1:36:16
  Speaker 2: looks like they had nothing to do with it. And
• 1:36:22
  Speaker 2: three of these guys, apparently, she wasn't that upset. She's
• 1:36:26
  Speaker 2: willing to come back. Yep. And she wasn't that upset
• 1:36:31
  Speaker 2: until she was no longer allowed to come back. And
• 1:36:37
  Speaker 2: then we have this smearing of these guys. It's just unbelievable. Okay, continue, Brian.
• 1:36:45
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 1:36:47
  Speaker 4: Appropriately within 10 seconds of arriving at a party during
• 1:36:50
  Speaker 4: her freshman year at Boston University. Less than a week later,
• 1:36:54
  Speaker 4: she was disturbed by what she witnessed at another party
• 1:36:57
  Speaker 4: at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
• 1:36:59
  Speaker 3: And I was horrified at what I saw. I was
• 1:37:03
  Speaker 3: 17 years old. I had been, you know, really kept
• 1:37:08
  Speaker 3: from a lot of things like that when I was
• 1:37:10
  Speaker 3: in high school and I walked in and I saw just,
• 1:37:17
  Speaker 3: you know, incapacitated women, men taking advantage of them, people
• 1:37:24
  Speaker 3: making decisions.
• 1:37:25
  Speaker 2: And I mean, it was just horrible.
• 1:37:29
  Speaker 3: When I read about what.
• 1:37:30
  Speaker 2: Happened, what constant incapacitated women. So you walked into a
• 1:37:36
  Speaker 2: room where men were having sex with women who were incapacitated.
• 1:37:42
  Speaker 2: Was this MIT or a local fetish club?
• 1:37:46
  Speaker 1: She's claiming it was, uh, MIT. And I think, uh,
• 1:37:50
  Speaker 1: some other, some other place too.
• 1:37:52
  Speaker 2: What does she mean by incapacitated drunk?
• 1:37:55
  Speaker 1: Who knows?
• 1:37:55
  Speaker 2: This is, Yeah, she can just say it. She just
• 1:37:59
  Speaker 2: weaves the web. She just creates the tonal atmosphere. She
• 1:38:03
  Speaker 2: doesn't have to.
• 1:38:04
  Speaker 1: Bring any receipts, Allison. She just says it. And the
• 1:38:07
  Speaker 1: thing is, she never brought this up before. I'll just
• 1:38:12
  Speaker 1: say that. This is like a new story about her
• 1:38:17
  Speaker 1: that we're now learning. And it just so happens to
• 1:38:19
  Speaker 1: be very conveniently timed during the resurgence or the reemergence
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 1: of this story, which is like two years old. So, yeah,
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 1: the women are just going to eat it up anyways.
• 1:38:30
  Speaker 1: and she knows that like that's that's that's the thing
• 1:38:34
  Speaker 1: like she's basically trying to become president in 2028 i
• 1:38:38
  Speaker 1: think and this is all the seeds like oh look
• 1:38:42
  Speaker 1: ladies i'm just like you haven't you also experienced this
• 1:38:45
  Speaker 1: and of course women everywhere they're all going to say
• 1:38:47
  Speaker 1: they have even if they haven't Because they want to
• 1:38:50
  Speaker 1: feel included. So just be like, yeah, yeah, I felt
• 1:38:53
  Speaker 1: unsafe many times. Therefore, the unsafeness I felt is justified.
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 2: The other thing is that this is all bullshit. And
• 1:39:03
  Speaker 2: you know why? Statistically, this is bullshit. You know why
• 1:39:07
  Speaker 2: I know it's bullshit? Because statistically, she should be seeing
• 1:39:11
  Speaker 2: at least one third of those people who are incapacitated
• 1:39:14
  Speaker 2: and being assaulted should have been men. I noticed that's
• 1:39:17
  Speaker 2: never included.
• 1:39:19
  Speaker 1: Never.
• 1:39:21
  Speaker 2: It's never part of this. I mean, the campus situation
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 2: is actually pretty... A while back, I did an analysis
• 1:39:32
  Speaker 2: of campus sexual assault. There's a large amount of young
• 1:39:36
  Speaker 2: men who are being assaulted on campuses. So if we
• 1:39:40
  Speaker 2: don't hear about them, it's because they're being excluded from
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 2: narratives like this. When you described how two of the
• 1:39:52
  Speaker 2: Cornell 7 themselves said that they were sexually assaulted, I
• 1:39:56
  Speaker 2: hold the line because I don't know specifically what happened,
• 1:40:00
  Speaker 2: so I can't sign off on that. Who knows what
• 1:40:02
  Speaker 2: actually happened? They're not giving many details.
• 1:40:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:40:07
  Speaker 2: But perhaps something more than her just coming on to
• 1:40:10
  Speaker 2: them happened, which is why they're willing to say that.
• 1:40:14
  Speaker 2: But notice how that's become invisible in all of this.
• 1:40:19
  Speaker 2: In all of this. And when I looked at the statistics,
• 1:40:22
  Speaker 2: there is a high amount of sexual... There's a kind
• 1:40:27
  Speaker 2: of a culture of getting drunk and taking advantage of
• 1:40:30
  Speaker 2: each other in a certain part of college life. But
• 1:40:36
  Speaker 2: the women are doing it too. And the fact that
• 1:40:40
  Speaker 2: that's never talked about is really telling. And it's why
• 1:40:43
  Speaker 2: I know AOC is full of shit. The governor of
• 1:40:49
  Speaker 2: New York is full of shit.
• 1:40:52
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:40:53
  Speaker 2: They're all full of shit. And the moment they won't
• 1:40:57
  Speaker 2: be full of shit is the moment that they acknowledge
• 1:40:59
  Speaker 2: that women do it too. That's the moment they won't
• 1:41:03
  Speaker 2: be full of shit and pushing a narrative. Mm-hmm. I
• 1:41:10
  Speaker 2: just can't fucking believe it. Like two guys just walk
• 1:41:12
  Speaker 2: into a room and leave and they're part of the
• 1:41:14
  Speaker 2: blast radius. Two guys actually possibly were sexually assaulted themselves.
• 1:41:19
  Speaker 2: They're part of the blast radius.
• 1:41:20
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:41:21
  Speaker 2: I hope those three dudes who got their dicks wet,
• 1:41:24
  Speaker 2: I hope it was worth it for them. I don't
• 1:41:26
  Speaker 2: think it was. I don't think that any, either of
• 1:41:28
  Speaker 2: them are looking at this.
• 1:41:28
  Speaker 1: Oh no, their lives are, their lives are over. They've been,
• 1:41:32
  Speaker 1: you know, expelled or suspended. But even then, like, what
• 1:41:36
  Speaker 1: does it matter? Like, that's going to be, you know,
• 1:41:38
  Speaker 1: something they have to carry around for the rest of
• 1:41:41
  Speaker 1: their lives. People are going to remember. And even if they, like,
• 1:41:44
  Speaker 1: they could be found completely innocent and they could issue
• 1:41:46
  Speaker 1: statements and everything and there'll be plenty of people who'll
• 1:41:49
  Speaker 1: be like, no, I think they did it. I mean,
• 1:41:51
  Speaker 1: look how they're treating Patrick Clancy. Like, even a victim
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 1: becomes a perpetrator if he's a man. So, yeah. It's
• 1:42:01
  Speaker 1: not worth it, definitively.
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 2: Yeah, Patrick Clancy. I wanted to say something about that.
• 1:42:06
  Speaker 2: It's just, I just can't, you know, one time, or
• 1:42:09
  Speaker 2: actually when I went to the Canadian Association for Men
• 1:42:15
  Speaker 2: and Families.
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 1: Cafe?
• 1:42:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah, cafe. They changed their acronym.
• 1:42:22
  Speaker 1: I know, yeah, it's different now.
• 1:42:24
  Speaker 2: Why do they do this? But anyway, when I went
• 1:42:27
  Speaker 2: to their conference in 2019, I ended up, interestingly enough,
• 1:42:34
  Speaker 2: flying next to a woman who had dealt with men
• 1:42:36
  Speaker 2: who were suicidal and she described the fact that in
• 1:42:43
  Speaker 2: many cases these guys would check into a hotel room
• 1:42:46
  Speaker 2: so that their families wouldn't discover the body and she
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 2: was thinking about how you know that kind of premeditation
• 1:42:53
  Speaker 2: that you would and I was thinking about that in
• 1:42:55
  Speaker 2: terms of the Lindsay Clancy trial she didn't even think
• 1:43:01
  Speaker 2: about How that was going to be experienced by her husband.
• 1:43:07
  Speaker 2: Coming home to that. She didn't even cross her mind.
• 1:43:13
  Speaker 2: And nobody even considers that.
• 1:43:15
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 1:43:17
  Speaker 2: At what point do we actually think about women's responsibilities
• 1:43:22
  Speaker 2: to not destroy their husbands? Or even hold them to
• 1:43:29
  Speaker 2: that standard. But anyway, it's like That was just something
• 1:43:32
  Speaker 2: that occurred to me with the Lindsay Clancy trial. Just
• 1:43:35
  Speaker 2: the fact that she didn't spare him at all.
• 1:43:39
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 1:43:40
  Speaker 2: Anyway, let's keep going.
• 1:43:42
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 1:43:44
  Speaker 3: Those men posted in a group chat. That means it
• 1:43:49
  Speaker 3: was normal to them.
• 1:43:51
  Speaker 4: She then directed a message of support to the woman,
• 1:43:53
  Speaker 4: identified only as Jane Doe, who filed the lawsuit.
• 1:43:57
  Speaker 3: Jane Doe, if you are listening, or a survivor of
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 3: any gender, mind you, because so many men and young
• 1:44:03
  Speaker 3: boys are subject to this as well, that if you
• 1:44:07
  Speaker 3: have been subject to this, I want you to know
• 1:44:10
  Speaker 3: that you are not defined by the things that have
• 1:44:13
  Speaker 3: happened to you. You are bigger than that. You are
• 1:44:17
  Speaker 3: stronger than them, and they will never define you for
• 1:44:20
  Speaker 3: your entire life. And that you can achieve anything that
• 1:44:24
  Speaker 3: you want to achieve from one survivor to another.
• 1:44:27
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 1:44:29
  Speaker 2: Why is it that.
• 1:44:32
  Speaker 2: Okay, fair enough. I'll give her props for including men.
• 1:44:35
  Speaker 1: She wants their votes too, Allison. That's all it is.
• 1:44:38
  Speaker 1: Why would you champion this particular case?
• 1:44:47
  Speaker 2: The thing is that if you actually read it, it's
• 1:44:51
  Speaker 2: a really wicked he said, she said situation.
• 1:44:55
  Speaker 1: Sure.
• 1:44:56
  Speaker 2: But also, potentially, it could have male victims in it.
• 1:45:01
  Speaker 2: Why would you say this one? And then why would
• 1:45:05
  Speaker 2: you use the examples? Oh, it's obviously men doing it.
• 1:45:10
  Speaker 2: Like I saw men taking advantage of incapacitated women.
• 1:45:14
  Speaker 1: Mm-hmm.
• 1:45:17
  Speaker 2: If you are going to say men are survivors, then
• 1:45:23
  Speaker 2: why aren't they included properly? I will give her props
• 1:45:27
  Speaker 2: for even mentioning them, but I'm guessing she doesn't mean
• 1:45:29
  Speaker 2: of women.
• 1:45:32
  Speaker 1: No.
• 1:45:32
  Speaker 2: Anyway, let's keep going.
• 1:45:33
  Speaker 1: No. That's the end of that clip. Also, Chuck Schumer
• 1:45:39
  Speaker 1: said something as well. He said the allegations of sexual
• 1:45:43
  Speaker 1: assault and rape at Cornell University are horrifying and deserve
• 1:45:47
  Speaker 1: a thorough investigation that leaves no stone unturned. It took
• 1:45:50
  Speaker 1: extraordinary courage for this young woman to come forward to
• 1:45:53
  Speaker 1: university administrators and police. What she reported demanded urgency, seriousness,
• 1:45:59
  Speaker 1: and an unflinching pursuit of the truth from the very beginning.
• 1:46:02
  Speaker 1: Sexual assault remains far too common on college campuses across America,
• 1:46:07
  Speaker 1: and the culture of silence and complicity that allows it
• 1:46:09
  Speaker 1: to persist must be confronted. It is incumbent upon all
• 1:46:13
  Speaker 1: of us, elected officials, university leaders, faculty, and students, to
• 1:46:17
  Speaker 1: build campus communities where sexual violence is never tolerated, minimized,
• 1:46:21
  Speaker 1: or ignored. There must now be a truly independent and
• 1:46:25
  Speaker 1: exhaustive investigation, not only into what happened, but into how
• 1:46:29
  Speaker 1: this case was handled from the moment she came forward.
• 1:46:32
  Speaker 1: Every fact must be uncovered. Every failure must be examined.
• 1:46:35
  Speaker 1: Wherever wrongdoing occurred, there must be accountability. She had the
• 1:46:39
  Speaker 1: courage to come forward. No survivor should have to summon
• 1:46:42
  Speaker 1: that courage and then fight the system to make it respond. So...
• 1:46:48
  Speaker 1: She came forward.
• 1:46:48
  Speaker 2: With an allegation. After they said no, you can't go
• 1:46:54
  Speaker 2: back to the site of the crime, alleged crime. After
• 1:46:58
  Speaker 2: the fraternity president said, I don't think it's a good
• 1:47:02
  Speaker 2: idea for us to continue to allow this to occur. Right.
• 1:47:07
  Speaker 2: And I mean, that's really what he's saying. Does anybody
• 1:47:10
  Speaker 2: anybody really think I mean, he's not going to say
• 1:47:14
  Speaker 2: to her, yeah, I don't want you. I don't want
• 1:47:17
  Speaker 2: you having three multiple, you know, getting into a gang
• 1:47:21
  Speaker 2: bangs on the on the fraternity in the fraternity. He's
• 1:47:25
  Speaker 2: not going to say that. It's just be like, you
• 1:47:27
  Speaker 2: know what? You're disinvited from the from the party. Like
• 1:47:31
  Speaker 2: you're not. I don't think it's a good idea. And
• 1:47:34
  Speaker 2: that's when she starts thinking, oh, maybe I was raped.
• 1:47:38
  Speaker 2: That's what we're dealing with here. And then she goes
• 1:47:43
  Speaker 2: to the Cornell police, gives testimony. They help her create
• 1:47:49
  Speaker 2: an affidavit. They omit evidence of innocence on the part
• 1:47:54
  Speaker 2: of the defendants. They also omit her, frankly, erroneous legal testimony.
• 1:48:00
  Speaker 2: Estimate legal judgment because she's not a lawyer that she
• 1:48:04
  Speaker 2: was 100% definitely right because it wasn't enthusiastic. I mean,
• 1:48:07
  Speaker 2: it wasn't like when did it stop being enthusiastic? Like
• 1:48:11
  Speaker 2: what what is the level of enthusiasm? Because I'm thinking that,
• 1:48:15
  Speaker 2: you know, if you you go on a ride in
• 1:48:17
  Speaker 2: Disney and then you go back. in the line to
• 1:48:21
  Speaker 2: go again immediately that that counts as a form of
• 1:48:25
  Speaker 2: enthusiasm now I mean you could argue oh hey she
• 1:48:30
  Speaker 2: does she didn't sign on when she signed on to
• 1:48:32
  Speaker 2: go to the party again the same scenario, the same
• 1:48:37
  Speaker 2: situation that led to the first ride, you know, when
• 1:48:41
  Speaker 2: she signed on to go again, she didn't mean that. Right.
• 1:48:49
  Speaker 2: And when the president said, for your own good, he
• 1:48:52
  Speaker 2: wasn't referring to the gangbang or the increased probability that
• 1:48:57
  Speaker 2: another gangbang would occur. Oh, no, that's not. She just
• 1:49:01
  Speaker 2: wanted to tell them all about Jesus. And how to
• 1:49:09
  Speaker 2: bring Jesus to their life. She wanted to go back.
• 1:49:19
  Speaker 2: She wanted to hang out with these guys. At what
• 1:49:23
  Speaker 2: point do we recognize that suggests something about the situation?
• 1:49:28
  Speaker 2: And the moment she was no longer allowed to, in
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 2: the particular arrangement that she wanted, because apparently hanging out
• 1:49:35
  Speaker 2: with them in the lunchroom wasn't good enough, hanging out
• 1:49:38
  Speaker 2: with them in the study room in the library wasn't
• 1:49:40
  Speaker 2: good enough, she specifically needed to hang out with them
• 1:49:44
  Speaker 2: where booze and drugs and partying was involved. At what
• 1:49:51
  Speaker 2: point do we say, hey, that's not kosher, that doesn't
• 1:49:54
  Speaker 2: pass the sniff test? If this was a man doing this,
• 1:49:57
  Speaker 2: if this was a man engaging in this behavior, we
• 1:49:59
  Speaker 2: would know exactly what it was, right? Engaging in the
• 1:50:03
  Speaker 2: behavior of a woman saying, yeah, no, I think we
• 1:50:06
  Speaker 2: were better off friends. And then he escalates because he
• 1:50:09
  Speaker 2: does not like that. No, we know exactly what that is,
• 1:50:14
  Speaker 2: but somehow we just don't see it if it's a woman.
• 1:50:19
  Speaker 2: And then Chuck Schumer. And again, oh, police. They took
• 1:50:23
  Speaker 2: her testimony. They worked with her to give an affidavit
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 2: to the DA. The DA looks at it and says, yeah,
• 1:50:30
  Speaker 2: this isn't rape. Sorry, it doesn't fit the law. And
• 1:50:36
  Speaker 2: the governor even acknowledges that by saying, let's change the law.
• 1:50:42
  Speaker 2: So the next time a woman gets a no from
• 1:50:45
  Speaker 2: men who no longer want to, or a man who
• 1:50:48
  Speaker 2: no longer wants to create the situation that leads to
• 1:50:51
  Speaker 2: a gangbang, right? The next time she gets a no,
• 1:50:54
  Speaker 2: she can send him straight to jail. No Pasco. All right. Let's, uh, yeah,
• 1:51:02
  Speaker 2: I don't know what else to say. This is just, well,
• 1:51:05
  Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, I mean, it's an ignorance.
• 1:51:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Um, Well, I got a little bit of,
• 1:51:13
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think we got a couple of reactions
• 1:51:15
  Speaker 1: from politicians. From the media, I think that it's a
• 1:51:19
  Speaker 1: little bit more balanced. Well, not balanced, but like there's
• 1:51:23
  Speaker 1: a little bit more nuance in it. Like the New
• 1:51:25
  Speaker 1: Yorker framed it as revealing institutional carelessness by both the
• 1:51:30
  Speaker 1: DA and the university. The National Review urged them to
• 1:51:35
  Speaker 1: follow the evidence only and cooler heads amid a moral panic.
• 1:51:40
  Speaker 1: noting the DA's description of the 2024 statement as describing
• 1:51:44
  Speaker 1: voluntary-slash-consensual participation and questioned whether it was even rape under
• 1:51:49
  Speaker 1: the law as presented then. The New York Post compared
• 1:51:53
  Speaker 1: the reaction to lynch mob hysteria like Duke Lacrosse or
• 1:51:58
  Speaker 1: Mattress Girl cases. They criticized naming and shaming of the
• 1:52:02
  Speaker 1: men involved, the accused, the doxing, the job losses for
• 1:52:06
  Speaker 1: the accused, and lefty polls jumping in. argued that we've
• 1:52:11
  Speaker 1: learned nothing from past injustices. So that's actually kind of
• 1:52:15
  Speaker 1: refreshing from the media. From the New York Post, rather.
• 1:52:20
  Speaker 1: Salon argued the case shows hashtag MeToo did not go
• 1:52:23
  Speaker 1: far enough. Oh well. Criticized the backlash against the accuser
• 1:52:28
  Speaker 1: as a witch hunt and victim blaming. Because of course
• 1:52:32
  Speaker 1: Salon did that. And USA Today noted that in the
• 1:52:37
  Speaker 1: public eye, the accused are already treated as guilty, contrasting
• 1:52:42
  Speaker 1: the politician-celebrity assumptions with due process concerns. In terms of celebrities,
• 1:52:50
  Speaker 1: Florence Pugh here made a high-profile Instagram post expressing that
• 1:52:58
  Speaker 1: she felt, quote, uneasy and sick and anxious about enraged
• 1:53:03
  Speaker 1: and called on men to be as horrified and sickened
• 1:53:07
  Speaker 1: as us. She led conversations against complicity and questioned how
• 1:53:13
  Speaker 1: women can trust not all men, which many, when many
• 1:53:17
  Speaker 1: stay quiet. What?
• 1:53:19
  Speaker 2: She looks like she skins puppies. I'm sorry.
• 1:53:21
  Speaker 1: The woman on the right, on the right, not this old.
• 1:53:23
  Speaker 2: Yes. The woman on the right. Look at the fucking smirk.
• 1:53:28
  Speaker 1: I think her face is just kind of naturally asymmetrical.
• 1:53:33
  Speaker 2: No, no, no. That's a smirk.
• 1:53:36
  Speaker 1: Okay. Yeah, okay.
• 1:53:38
  Speaker 2: She's smirking. Don't look at that one, the right side.
• 1:53:41
  Speaker 2: That's going up. It's a fucking duplicitous smirk.
• 1:53:46
  Speaker 1: Mm-hmm.
• 1:53:48
  Speaker 2: Okay, so men should be outraged. Why? Why exactly should
• 1:53:54
  Speaker 2: this woman have the right to jail men And apparently
• 1:54:02
  Speaker 2: because they said no to her. Or a man said
• 1:54:05
  Speaker 2: no to her. Like, I wonder, I wonder, like, I
• 1:54:09
  Speaker 2: can only infer what's actually happening. The president, the fraternity
• 1:54:14
  Speaker 2: president says, no, you're not coming, like, chill off on
• 1:54:17
  Speaker 2: the parties, right? Chill off on the parties. And presumably, like,
• 1:54:26
  Speaker 2: the three dudes that she slept with or had her
• 1:54:30
  Speaker 2: adventure with, Could they not have gone somewhere else to
• 1:54:34
  Speaker 2: do it? Was it necessary to do it at a
• 1:54:37
  Speaker 2: fraternity party? Right? Was that necessary?
• 1:54:42
  Speaker 1: I have no idea.
• 1:54:43
  Speaker 2: Couldn't they have made other arrangements? I'm wondering if in
• 1:54:48
  Speaker 2: the cool light of day when those guys woke up,
• 1:54:52
  Speaker 2: there was a lot of showering and scrubbing. That's how
• 1:54:57
  Speaker 2: we say. Because, I mean, like I said... You'd think
• 1:55:04
  Speaker 2: that if they were into it, they could have just
• 1:55:05
  Speaker 2: rearranged another situation for it. I'm just saying. And I
• 1:55:09
  Speaker 2: know that this is an inference and it's a shaky one.
• 1:55:13
  Speaker 2: But you'd think if they were enthusiastic, they could have
• 1:55:16
  Speaker 2: got around the party band that she was on.
• 1:55:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:55:21
  Speaker 2: But anyway. Let's keep going.
• 1:55:25
  Speaker 1: All right. So Jamila Jamil, I don't know who this is,
• 1:55:29
  Speaker 1: but she's an actress. The Good Place actress and women's
• 1:55:33
  Speaker 1: rights activist, isn't that funny? I thought we just called
• 1:55:36
  Speaker 1: them feminists, wrote in a post on Instagram, quote, I
• 1:55:41
  Speaker 1: think the likes of the Cornell Seven shouldn't be allowed
• 1:55:43
  Speaker 1: penises anymore. They use them as weapons, so now they
• 1:55:47
  Speaker 1: have to be confiscated. I think jail time, legal castration,
• 1:55:50
  Speaker 1: and removal of the shaft seems like the bare minimum.
• 1:55:55
  Speaker 2: Again, two of these guys just walked in the room, guys.
• 1:55:59
  Speaker 2: Two of them. And you know, the problem with this
• 1:56:01
  Speaker 2: is that there are a whole bunch of simps and
• 1:56:04
  Speaker 2: psychos who make this reality.
• 1:56:06
  Speaker 1: Yep. That's right.
• 1:56:07
  Speaker 2: They'll go out and they'll do it. They'll lynch these guys.
• 1:56:11
  Speaker 2: For what?
• 1:56:12
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 1:56:12
  Speaker 2: And then two of them just walked in the room. Right? Apparently.
• 1:56:16
  Speaker 2: And then just left. So they were just in the
• 1:56:18
  Speaker 2: blast radius. Two of them may have been genuinely sexually
• 1:56:21
  Speaker 2: assaulted by this individual of a certain merit. And then
• 1:56:26
  Speaker 2: three of them apparently... Honestly, by New York law, had
• 1:56:32
  Speaker 2: consensual sex with her, which she was fine with until
• 1:56:38
  Speaker 2: the fraternity president said, hey, I think you need to
• 1:56:41
  Speaker 2: chill off on coming to the parties where you're having subtext,
• 1:56:45
  Speaker 2: where you're having gang bangs, which I don't think is appropriate, probably.
• 1:56:51
  Speaker 2: And then she feels like she's been taken advantage of.
• 1:56:58
  Speaker 2: When they say no. When he says no. They should have,
• 1:57:02
  Speaker 2: all should have their penises removed.
• 1:57:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:57:06
  Speaker 2: For what? Because a woman had heard the word no? Like,
• 1:57:15
  Speaker 2: this is, this is sickening.
• 1:57:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I know. All right, one more celebrity reaction, then
• 1:57:23
  Speaker 1: I'll be done here. Josh Gad, the actor who's known
• 1:57:26
  Speaker 1: for voicing Olaf in the Disney film Frozen, shared a
• 1:57:30
  Speaker 1: lengthy statement to Instagram which had been liked one million
• 1:57:33
  Speaker 1: times as of reporting.
• 1:57:35
  Speaker 2: One million times.
• 1:57:36
  Speaker 1: One million times, yes. All right, let me be loud
• 1:57:41
  Speaker 1: and clear. When we start setting a precedent that our
• 1:57:45
  Speaker 1: girls and women can be brutally raped and the resulting
• 1:57:47
  Speaker 1: disciplinary action is to hand out checks, notes, Essays, like
• 1:57:52
  Speaker 1: it's Bart Simpson being a little rascal, about why it
• 1:57:55
  Speaker 1: was wrong to brutally violate an innocent girl, we have
• 1:57:58
  Speaker 1: lost our fucking minds. The promising young and bright Cornell
• 1:58:02
  Speaker 1: boys lost the right to a future when they stole
• 1:58:05
  Speaker 1: a future from a helpless young woman. Remember, look at
• 1:58:08
  Speaker 1: how this is all being framed. That's not a mistake
• 1:58:11
  Speaker 1: that these aw shucks gee whiz rapist fellas learn from.
• 1:58:15
  Speaker 1: That's a violent and sick criminal act that doesn't take
• 1:58:18
  Speaker 1: a fucking Cornell degree to understand its evil. At this point,
• 1:58:22
  Speaker 1: it doesn't seem to matter if a woman accuses a president,
• 1:58:25
  Speaker 1: a Supreme Court justice, a private university student, or an athlete.
• 1:58:29
  Speaker 1: There is no such thing as white-collar rape. This isn't
• 1:58:33
  Speaker 1: an oopsie-daisy. It's the destruction of a life. And we
• 1:58:37
  Speaker 1: are sending a profoundly disturbing message with our inability to
• 1:58:40
  Speaker 1: hold anyone accountable that this is okay. Fuck that enough. Again,
• 1:58:47
  Speaker 1: it's just virtue signaling. I mean, it's empty.
• 1:58:52
  Speaker 2: She was fine. No indication. Until the fraternity president said, no,
• 1:59:00
  Speaker 2: we're not letting you return to the situation that created
• 1:59:05
  Speaker 2: the gangbang. That's when it all started. That was the
• 1:59:10
  Speaker 2: moment where she's like, hmm, I don't think you're my
• 1:59:13
  Speaker 2: friend anymore. You're not allowing me sexual access to you.
• 1:59:17
  Speaker 2: I don't think you're my friends anymore. Yep.
• 1:59:20
  Speaker 1: And this is what Go laughed.
• 1:59:26
  Speaker 4: Of all.
• 1:59:26
  Speaker 2: He's such an incredible simp. I could not be... This
• 1:59:31
  Speaker 2: could not be more appropriate for behavior for this Disney character.
• 1:59:36
  Speaker 2: The voice actor thereof. And again, this is what these
• 1:59:44
  Speaker 2: guys have to look at. Two of them. Not involved
• 1:59:48
  Speaker 2: at all. Apparently just walked into the room and left.
• 1:59:52
  Speaker 2: Two of them. Possibly sexually assaulted by this woman themselves. Now,
• 1:59:56
  Speaker 2: I don't know the details, so it's very alleged. Three
• 1:59:59
  Speaker 2: of them apparently had a consensual sexual foursome or threesome
• 2:00:06
  Speaker 2: or whatever, right? And apparently she was fine enough with
• 2:00:10
  Speaker 2: it that she was willing to return to the scene
• 2:00:12
  Speaker 2: of the crime and only got upset when she was
• 2:00:14
  Speaker 2: denied that access. And these are the people, these are
• 2:00:19
  Speaker 2: the young men who have to look at this and
• 2:00:22
  Speaker 2: know that this is going to trail their name for
• 2:00:24
  Speaker 2: the rest of their life. There's something seriously sick about
• 2:00:31
  Speaker 2: our society. And then every institution is implicated because it
• 2:00:36
  Speaker 2: didn't bend over backwards the instant she whispered the word rape.
• 2:00:42
  Speaker 2: And again, this girl thought that she had to enthusiastically consent.
• 2:00:49
  Speaker 2: And presumably the enthusiastic consent... can be applied retroactively. So
• 2:00:55
  Speaker 2: maybe in the moment she enthusiastically consented to the activity,
• 2:00:59
  Speaker 2: but when she was denied returning to the same situation
• 2:01:03
  Speaker 2: that resulted in the activity, she no longer felt enthusiastic,
• 2:01:09
  Speaker 2: I guess. In terms of her, she looked back and
• 2:01:15
  Speaker 2: she said, no, that wasn't real enthusiasm. I don't know.
• 2:01:23
  Speaker 2: This is untenable, Brian. Yeah. This is unworkable. Are we
• 2:01:28
  Speaker 2: doing the New Yorker one too?
• 2:01:30
  Speaker 1: No, I think that's it. We're at the two hour mark.
• 2:01:34
  Speaker 1: There's nothing else to say. I just have like, I
• 2:01:36
  Speaker 1: just put it.
• 2:01:37
  Speaker 2: Up as like a back thing.
• 2:01:40
  Speaker 1: So do we have thank yous?
• 2:01:42
  Speaker 2: Yes, we do.
• 2:01:42
  Speaker 1: Okay, good.
• 2:01:43
  Speaker 2: So I will do the thank yous. See if there's
• 2:01:48
  Speaker 2: any further questions. And I just want to remind everyone
• 2:01:53
  Speaker 2: to go to feedthebadger.com slash support to support the show
• 2:01:57
  Speaker 2: and support our analysis. And big thank you to, let's
• 2:02:01
  Speaker 2: see what they wanted to be called. I keep forgetting
• 2:02:04
  Speaker 2: that process. Big thank you to, I needed some drum roll.
• 2:02:11
  Speaker 1: I don't have a drum roll. Thank you. Wow.
• 2:02:15
  Speaker 2: Water for 50. Yeah. And then spiky helmet badger for 500.
• 2:02:20
  Speaker 2: Thank you. Spiky helmet badger. And we now have 650 left, guys.
• 2:02:28
  Speaker 2: So I'm guessing there might be like, I don't know,
• 2:02:30
  Speaker 2: a few dozen. If every one of you listening to
• 2:02:33
  Speaker 2: me now with 650 left went and put in $ 10,
• 2:02:43
  Speaker 2: would that be it? Yeah, I think that would, it
• 2:02:46
  Speaker 2: would be done. So please consider doing so at feedthebadger.com
• 2:02:50
  Speaker 2: slash support. very much appreciated if you would do that
• 2:02:53
  Speaker 2: so we can continue to bring you this scintillating content
• 2:02:56
  Speaker 2: and this analysis that I don't think you get anywhere
• 2:02:59
  Speaker 2: else because we, we look at women's responsibilities to men
• 2:03:03
  Speaker 2: and this woman really failed. Like it's not even that
• 2:03:05
  Speaker 2: she had a threesome or a foursome or whatever happened.
• 2:03:10
  Speaker 2: It says she's, she didn't accept that maybe it shouldn't
• 2:03:16
  Speaker 2: happen again or maybe, maybe it wasn't a good thing
• 2:03:18
  Speaker 2: that it happened. Um, And she couldn't accept that the
• 2:03:23
  Speaker 2: fraternity brother said, no, you can't come back. This is
• 2:03:26
  Speaker 2: getting out of hand. It's for your own good, because
• 2:03:30
  Speaker 2: I feel like this might happen again for some reason, right?
• 2:03:34
  Speaker 2: And it's not a good idea. And that's the moment
• 2:03:37
  Speaker 2: when she started to feel resentment, enough resentment to start
• 2:03:41
  Speaker 2: thinking of her sexual partners in the worst terms possible,
• 2:03:46
  Speaker 2: in terms that could destroy their lives and potentially have.
• 2:03:51
  Speaker 2: And not even her sexual partners, just every dude in
• 2:03:53
  Speaker 2: the room, every dude in the blast radius. And now
• 2:03:58
  Speaker 2: we have celebrities making the most retarded comments and getting
• 2:04:04
  Speaker 2: millions of likes on them. And a governor who wants
• 2:04:09
  Speaker 2: to change the laws to make it easier for somebody
• 2:04:13
  Speaker 2: to do, like to actually send young men to jail
• 2:04:16
  Speaker 2: for this. Oh, it's really untenable, I think. All right,
• 2:04:25
  Speaker 2: so Brian, did you want to say anything?
• 2:04:27
  Speaker 1: No, I think I said everything I wanted to say.
• 2:04:29
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is still ongoing, so I guess we'll
• 2:04:32
  Speaker 1: see where it goes. But yeah, I mean, I don't know.
• 2:04:40
  Speaker 1: I don't think, I think guys, if you go to college,
• 2:04:42
  Speaker 1: you should not go to any of these parties. You
• 2:04:44
  Speaker 1: should not mess with any of the women there. And
• 2:04:48
  Speaker 1: not because I'm, like, morally, moral fagging on it, but
• 2:04:52
  Speaker 1: for your own protection. That's all. That's all I'll say
• 2:04:55
  Speaker 1: about it. Yeah. So, it's not worth it.
• 2:04:58
  Speaker 2: Yeah, for your own protection. Like, I'm pretty sure any
• 2:05:01
  Speaker 2: of the... I feel worse for the guys who just
• 2:05:05
  Speaker 2: walked in the room. And the guys who apparently were
• 2:05:07
  Speaker 2: sexually assaulted, according to them. Like, what did they do?
• 2:05:13
  Speaker 2: What the hell did they do?
• 2:05:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah. What did they do?
• 2:05:20
  Speaker 2: Yeah, what did they do? And now they have some
• 2:05:23
  Speaker 2: stupid women, some stupid freaking female celebrities saying that they
• 2:05:26
  Speaker 2: should be generally mutilated. What the hell did they do?
• 2:05:36
  Speaker 1: I mean, there were men that basically slept with a
• 2:05:38
  Speaker 1: woman who Lacey later regretted it and wants to ruin
• 2:05:42
  Speaker 1: their lives because she wants to protect herself.
• 2:05:46
  Speaker 2: Not even those dudes. I'm talking about the dudes who
• 2:05:48
  Speaker 2: were just in the room.
• 2:05:50
  Speaker 1: Well, their crime is they didn't intervene right away and
• 2:05:52
  Speaker 1: do something. I don't know what else it could be. Otherwise,
• 2:05:55
  Speaker 1: they're just guilty by association because they were part of
• 2:05:58
  Speaker 1: the same group chat or something. Just like AOC said.
• 2:06:03
  Speaker 2: When the guy intervened, when the president of the fraternity intervened,
• 2:06:07
  Speaker 2: that's when the problem started. That's when she started to think, hey,
• 2:06:13
  Speaker 2: I don't think they like me. I think it might
• 2:06:15
  Speaker 2: have been rape.
• 2:06:17
  Speaker 1: I get that, but, you know, I mean, I can't
• 2:06:20
  Speaker 1: put myself in the shoes of crazy people that think
• 2:06:23
  Speaker 1: that she's a victim. So all I know is they're
• 2:06:26
  Speaker 1: saying this about them, and that's all that matters. The
• 2:06:30
  Speaker 1: truth doesn't matter.
• 2:06:31
  Speaker 2: Oh, yeah, I see what you're saying.
• 2:06:32
  Speaker 1: It's a post-truth world now. Yeah.
• 2:06:36
  Speaker 2: Well, how come post-truth only seems to have male victims?
• 2:06:43
  Speaker 2: It's post-truth, and it's post-grand narratives, but we do know
• 2:06:46
  Speaker 2: that men are to blame.
• 2:06:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Yep. Okay.
• 2:06:51
  Speaker 2: All right. I'm going to do a double check. If
• 2:06:54
  Speaker 2: you're out there and you enjoy this content, please go
• 2:06:58
  Speaker 2: to feedthebadger.com slash support and support it. We exist because
• 2:07:01
  Speaker 2: you guys support us. That's it. And believe me, it's
• 2:07:05
  Speaker 2: very heartening to know that there are people out there
• 2:07:08
  Speaker 2: that this matters to because there's a lot of institutional
• 2:07:13
  Speaker 2: pressure against it. I'll say that. And it feels like
• 2:07:17
  Speaker 2: a really strong headwind to getting this stuff recognized. So
• 2:07:21
  Speaker 2: if you want to help us out, you want to
• 2:07:22
  Speaker 2: help increase our reach, feedthebadger.com slash support. Very, very big
• 2:07:27
  Speaker 2: thank you to Richard Beer for 250, Anonymous for 50,
• 2:07:33
  Speaker 2: Wouter for 50, and Spiky Helmet Badger for 500. Very
• 2:07:38
  Speaker 2: much appreciated.
• 2:07:38
  Speaker 1: Thank you.
• 2:07:39
  Speaker 2: It really does help. And if you want to join them, Yeah.
• 2:07:43
  Speaker 2: And be amazing too. Then go to feed the badger.com
• 2:07:46
  Speaker 2: slash just the tip. And if you want to jet, sorry,
• 2:07:48
  Speaker 2: feed the badger.com slash support. And if you want to
• 2:07:52
  Speaker 2: send us a message at any time after the show
• 2:07:53
  Speaker 2: is over, feedthebadger.com slash just the tip is the very
• 2:07:57
  Speaker 2: best way to send it because it goes somewhere I
• 2:07:59
  Speaker 2: mean you can't really send us a message on YouTube
• 2:08:01
  Speaker 2: after the show is over but also YouTube will yoink
• 2:08:05
  Speaker 2: your message if it triggers any one of YouTube's many
• 2:08:09
  Speaker 2: triggers and we get the full benefit of whatever funds
• 2:08:12
  Speaker 2: you send and if you want to join us in
• 2:08:14
  Speaker 2: our community that's at badgernation.online we have events you can
• 2:08:19
  Speaker 2: Watch me lose my mind as I attempt to figure
• 2:08:22
  Speaker 2: out if anything in the world is not just based
• 2:08:25
  Speaker 2: on women's feelings at this point in time. And that
• 2:08:29
  Speaker 2: is at badgernation.online. All of these options are in the
• 2:08:32
  Speaker 2: low bar as well. And Brian, I'll hand it to
• 2:08:35
  Speaker 2: you if you want to make any final commentary on this.
• 2:08:37
  Speaker 2: It's a little boggling, isn't it?
• 2:08:40
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but I don't really have anything to add. Like
• 2:08:44
  Speaker 1: I said, I think I said what I wanted to
• 2:08:46
  Speaker 1: say about it. So, yeah, I guess we'll just take
• 2:08:51
  Speaker 1: us out. So if you guys like this video, please
• 2:08:53
  Speaker 1: hit like. Subscribe if you're not already subscribed. Hit the
• 2:08:56
  Speaker 1: bell for notifications. Leave us a comment. Let us know
• 2:08:58
  Speaker 1: what you guys think about this Cornell 7 thing that's re-emerged.
• 2:09:02
  Speaker 1: And also, do you have any people that you're friends
• 2:09:04
  Speaker 1: with or know that they're not aware of this stuff?
• 2:09:08
  Speaker 1: Let us know about that in the comments. And share
• 2:09:11
  Speaker 1: the video because sharing is caring. Thanks so much for
• 2:09:13
  Speaker 1: coming on this episode of Maintaining Frame. And we will
• 2:09:16
  Speaker 1: talk to you guys in the next one. Have a
• 2:09:18
  Speaker 1: good weekend, everybody.