Latest / The Death Of Journalism / Episode Three Hundred Fifteen: The Infantilizing Of Jane Doe

Transcript

Episode Three Hundred Fifteen: The Infantilizing Of Jane Doe · The Death Of Journalism

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome to episode 315 of the Death of Journalism podcast.
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: My name is John Ziegler. I'm your host on this
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: week's show. The media malpractice continues in the Cornell botched orgy.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: A Democrat congressional candidate in Arizona says, me too, how
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: Comedy Central's Jon Stewart is doing the best job of
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: covering AI. A headshot of my daughter goes super viral
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: on X, further revealing how awful social media is, and
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: the saga of a Penn State football legend doing an
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: interview with me where he declares that he believes Jerry
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: Sandusky is innocent. We begin this episode of the podcast
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: with the never-ending and always evolving Cornell botched orgy, whatever
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: the hell you want to call it, story. I still
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: haven't come up with a particularly good name for it,
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: but to call it the Cornell 7 is factually inaccurate.
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: To call it the gang rape story is just beyond
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: ridiculous based upon what we currently know. But we have
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: yet another example of major media malpractice with regard to
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: how it is that the media is selectively publicizing and
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: publishing information based upon what they seem to believe is
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: in the best interest of their preferred narrative, which is,
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: of course, the gang rape narrative. Specifically, we had a
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: situation occur in the past week where TMZ had to
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: be the bastion of truth, honesty, and transparency by publishing
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: texts from the Jane Doe accuser, which provide a completely,
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: at least in a rational world, a completely different view
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: in the days after this event of how she was
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: perceiving things specifically. And these were texts that were known
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: to other media outlets, the New York Times, CBS, CNN.
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: They withheld them. I believe ABC also was in this camp.
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: They did not publicize the fact that she, in an
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: exchange with one of the people she's now accusing of
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: raping her, referred to what happened as a gangbang. She did.
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: Days later. A gangbang. This may have been the next day,
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: but whatever it was, it was in the aftermath of this.
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: A gangbang. That's how she referred to it. She also
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: used the phrase, our body, our choice. Our body, our choice.
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: And most interestingly to me, because this has been a
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: subject that I have been focused on more than most people,
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: because I I'm a big believer in acts being more
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: powerful than words, especially in this kind of a circumstance.
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: We're being told that her words don't mean anything. Well,
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: what about her acts? And what about specifically the act
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: that she acknowledged to police weeks later where she voluntarily,
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: by her own accord, snorted ketamine off the apparently erect
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: penis of one of the guys she's now accusing of
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: rape while other guys were there all of this seemingly
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: for their amusement. Well, in these texts, she refers specifically
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: to that, an act that the guy didn't remember, which
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: is kind of amazing. And if true, I think very
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: relevant to what's really going on here and the double
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: standard between men and women when it comes to, well,
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: what is the definition of rape or incapacitated or what
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: have you. But she not only references this, but she
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: effectively brags about it. And I really do believe that,
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: and maybe I'm naive, I don't know, but I would
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: like to believe that even many of the most ardent
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: supporters of Jane Doe would at least pause if they
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: were even aware of this particular act that she not
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: just admitted to and remembered, which is important because of
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: the claim of incapacitation, but also bragged about, I would
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: like to believe that at least some, even of her
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: most ardent supporters would go, wait a minute, hold on.
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: Doesn't that indicate she knew what was going on? Doesn't
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: that indicate consent? Doesn't that provide a very different version
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: of what really transpired here? But again, this was TMZ
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: that was forced to do this. And I'm no fan
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: of TMZ. TMZ gets a lot of stuff wrong. They
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: are clearly motivated by clickbaiting or they engage in clickbaiting
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: quite a bit. Sometimes they get stories right, but they
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: are not reliable. And in cases like this, Harvey Levin
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: oftentimes has, who runs TMZ, has a very perverse incentive structure.
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: And a lot of times he has conflicts of interest
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: and I don't trust him at all. But for better
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: or for worse, they're the ones that officially published these texts.
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: And that facilitated me going on News Nation, the television
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: network News Nation, with Katie Pavlich. And this was kind
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: of interesting because the first time I went on News Nation,
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: it was not with Katie Pavlich. It was a fill-in host.
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: And I wasn't quite sure what the rules were. as
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: far as what I was allowed to say regarding this
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: snorting ketamine off the erect penis of one of those
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: that she's accusing of raping her. So I was very
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: vague about it. Well, I was not vague this particular
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: time for a couple of reasons. One, there was several
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: days for this story to kind of seep into the
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: ether of the media consciousness. And it wouldn't shock people
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: also because TMZ had now made it much more public.
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: And this was her texting about it as opposed to
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: telling the police about it several weeks later. And I
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: guess more directly in her words, but also because I
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: had time and inclination to get effectively Katie Pavlich's consent
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: to use a term that's probably particularly either appropriate or
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: inappropriate given the nature of this conversation. I went to
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: News Nation. I didn't go to Katie specifically, but I
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: went to a producer. I said, hey, look, we're going
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: to talk about these text messages. Am I allowed to
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: say the word penis? And they indicated that I was.
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: So I had Katie Pavlich's consent before I went on
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: News Nation with her. And specifically, and to my knowledge,
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: I might be the first person, certainly the first person
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: to do so, in very clear and unambiguous language. I
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: might be the first person on television to actually state
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: this particular act, which I think is key to understanding
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: why this was very, very likely not an act of
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: criminal rape. And so this will, much like we did
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: last week, this will kill a couple of different birds
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: with one stone. This will give you a sense of
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: those text messages as reported by Katie Pavlich. on News Nation,
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: as well as my response and my attack on the
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: news media, as well as me, I think for the
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: first time in my television career, using the word penis
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: on network television.
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: We are back with new information on the Cornell rape
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: allegations today. More text messages between Jane Doe and one
• 7:49
  Speaker 2: of the accused Cornell 7 were obtained and released by TMZ.
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: The accused reached out to Jane Doe and said, I
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: just want to apologize for how things went down. And
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: Jane Doe responded, saying, in part, anything anyone has to
• 8:02
  Speaker 2: say about the gangbang is out of their jurisdiction. In
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: another message sent by Jane Doe, she described snorting ketamine
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: off the fraternity brothers' man parts and called it, quote,
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: one of the most insane and jaw-dropping moments of the night.
• 8:16
  Speaker 2: He wrote back, I have no memory of that part.
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: That last part. We reached out to Jane Doe's attorney
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: who told us this, quote, she was processing what had
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: occurred and trying to get information. At this point, she
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: was still struggling. with accepting that she had been assaulted.
• 8:31
  Speaker 2: He added, quote, this is the definition of rape. The
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: hearing panel also found Mr. Newell chose to sexualize and
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: broadcast Ms. Doe's vulnerability and invite further abuse, which caused
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: at least three men unknown to Ms. Doe and likely
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: more to sexually abuse her. Jane Doe's attorney also sent
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: NewsNation B screenshots of threats that he says were sent
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: to his client, saying things like, If you care about
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: your family, withdraw the Cates and parts of Jane Doe's
• 8:54
  Speaker 2: statements from Cornell's Title IX investigation last year, which lasted
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: 12 days, have also been made public. She said, quote,
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: I was prostituted and I was held up like bait
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: for a gaggle of men and I didn't even know
• 9:06
  Speaker 2: what was happening. Join me now to respond to all
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: of this, Democratic strategist and Burn the Playbook podcast host,
• 9:11
  Speaker 2: Michael Starr Hopkins, and the Death of Journalism podcast host,
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: John Ziegler. John, let's start with you. We keep seeing
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: little bits and pieces of the story coming out. I
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: just want a full and honest accounting from both sides
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: so we can look at the story objectively to know
• 9:29
  Speaker 2: what happened. What do you say about the latest text
• 9:31
  Speaker 2: messages that we have?
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: Well, unfortunately, the news media is not cooperating with that
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: desire because the texts that you just articulated are not new.
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: They were in the possession of several media outlets that
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: did not make them public because I don't think they
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: felt like it helped the narrative that they've already become very,
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: very invested in. Let's be very clear, the news media
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: has created a moral panic around this case. And once
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: they get invested in a moral panic, we've seen it before,
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: we're going to see it again. Look out. There's no
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: going back. The truth no longer matters once a rush
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: to judgment has occurred. And that's what happened here. Those
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: text messages are incredibly important. The one you referenced to
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: me is the most dramatic. Because, look, I'm sorry. It's
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: been a long time since I was in college. And
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: for better or for worse, this never happened to me.
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: But if I had ever been in a threesome and
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: a woman voluntarily snorted drugs off my erect penis and
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: then bragged about it a couple days later, I would
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: take that as consent. And I think I would be
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: right to do that. Consent that could not be retracted
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: two years later in a lawsuit. Because that's what this
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: is all about. A lawsuit for money.
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and to the point about the media, the New
• 10:40
  Speaker 2: York Times reported partially on these text messages, but not
• 10:44
  Speaker 2: on the full scope of them, including the part about
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: the gangbang and the ketamine snorting. Michael, in terms of
• 10:51
  Speaker 2: the legal aspect here, the district attorney who originally did
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: not bring charges said at the time that this woman
• 10:59
  Speaker 2: was taken seriously, that her claim and what she was
• 11:02
  Speaker 2: saying was credible. But at the time, she said something
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: very different than is being litigated now. in the media?
• 11:11
  Speaker 3: There's a couple things I want to say. First of all,
• 11:13
  Speaker 3: this is why things go in front of a grand jury.
• 11:16
  Speaker 3: There's more than enough evidence here at least to get
• 11:19
  Speaker 3: in front of a grand jury and let them decide
• 11:22
  Speaker 3: rather than have what we are guessing are allegations and
• 11:28
  Speaker 3: some facts, if we can call them that, leak out
• 11:31
  Speaker 3: over time. When it comes to sexual assault, one in
• 11:34
  Speaker 3: five college women is sexually assaulted in or at least
• 11:40
  Speaker 3: it notifies someone that they've been sexually assaulted. It's one
• 11:42
  Speaker 3: of the most underreported crimes among college students. And so
• 11:47
  Speaker 3: when we talk about this, I think, one, we've got
• 11:49
  Speaker 3: to talk about it in a way that doesn't stop
• 11:53
  Speaker 3: women or decrease the likelihood that women will come forward
• 11:56
  Speaker 3: when these things have happened, while also being able to
• 11:59
  Speaker 3: give men who are being alleged to have committed these
• 12:04
  Speaker 3: acts the.
• 12:07
  Speaker 3: The innocence that they're afforded by the law. But in
• 12:11
  Speaker 3: the court of public opinion, though, we are allowed to
• 12:14
  Speaker 3: make judgments.
• 12:15
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but John, if the standard is that, you know,
• 12:17
  Speaker 2: there's drinking involved and therefore someone cannot consent, doesn't that
• 12:22
  Speaker 2: apply to men, too, who can be also taken advantage
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: of sexually?
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: That's only if we live in a world where men
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: and women are truly equal, which apparently liberals don't want
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: to live in because they want to treat men and
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: women very, very differently in all sorts of aspects of life.
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: Go ahead. A gross comment? No, I mean, look, I
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: think men and women ought to be treated equally. I
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: have two young daughters. I want them to be treated
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: equally and fairly, and I'm against rape and sexual abuse
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: as much as anybody. But there's no evidence that that
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: actually occurred here, and we've already destroyed, let's be clear,
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: we have already destroyed the so-called Cornell Sevens lives for
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: the rest of their existence, even though only four of
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: them actually had sexual contact with Jane Doe. So even
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: the number seven is wrong. Every single thing about this
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: case that we've been told by the news media is
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: at least in question, if not totally inaccurate.
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: We got to run. Michael, last word to you. But
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: I should point out that there is a young man
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: who had nothing to do with this, whose name was
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: erroneously in his address in a lawsuit, and his family
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: was served. So there's false accusations are very damaging. Ten seconds.
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: Go ahead.
• 13:26
  Speaker 3: The wrong person being served or accused is one thing.
• 13:29
  Speaker 3: But these individuals not only had sex with a woman
• 13:33
  Speaker 3: who was intoxicated by her volition, which doesn't matter, hold on,
• 13:38
  Speaker 3: but they then introduced into a conversation to invite more
• 13:42
  Speaker 3: men to come have sex with her.
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: I don't know whether that's illegal, but it's immoral. Charges
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: are not brought at the time, and we will see,
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: as you said, if the grand jury decides to do so.
• 13:52
  Speaker 2: John Ziegler, Michael Starr Hopkins, great to see you both.
• 13:54
  Speaker 1: Thank you. As always. Thank you, Katie. Now, in a
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: rational world, this series of revelations should dramatically change the
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: media narrative. But we don't live in that world. And
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: instead of a world where the news media outlets that
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: withheld this information all en masse apologizing and basically saying, okay, yeah,
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: we got caught. We're sorry. We're wrong. And we're going
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: to completely change the narrative of this thing because those
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: that are saying that these are relevant are 100% right.
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: None of that, of course, happened. There was never any
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: chance of that happening because the news media is invested
• 14:37
  Speaker 1: in a narrative. They're invested in this moral panic that
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: I referred to on News Nation. And once they're invested
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: in a moral panic, we've seen it before. We're going
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: to see it again. There's no going back. There's no
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: going back. And this becomes so critical because this is
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: how and why they withhold information that is contradictory to
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: the narrative that they're invested in. In a little bit,
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: I'm going to play a clip from CNN, which is
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: really astonishing and very, very telling about how once the
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: news media determines guilt in a situation like this, they
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: perceive all information through the prism of guilt. We saw
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: this time and time and time again when it came
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: to the whole Penn State, Jerry Sandusky, Joe Paterno situation.
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: But that's not the only example I've seen in my lifetime.
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: This happens on a regular basis now. Once the media
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: determines what their preferred narrative is and they're invested in it,
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: it's almost impossible to reverse it because they'll just ignore
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: anything that's inconsistent with what they already want to believe.
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: And because they're all basically having the same agenda and
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: they're all in this bubble. And so everyone's doing exactly
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: the same thing. There's no pressure for them to actually
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: reverse course or to admit that they were wrong. Now,
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: CBS did admit that they withheld the text, but there
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: was no real mea culpa. I mean, this is a scandal.
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: This is scandalous and should absolutely positively be destroy any
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: credibility that the legacy news media has on this story
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: and others like it going forward. But again, we don't
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: live in that world. And when it comes to the
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: Cornell case, we have lost our fucking minds. We are
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: so far beyond the gravitational pull of the rational earth.
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: We can't even see the rational earth anymore. There's so
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: many examples of this. Maybe the most ridiculous in the
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: last week has been that a New York state lawmaker
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: who an Asian female, has pitched a bill in New
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: York State, Cornell obviously is in New York, has pitched
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: a bill to give sex assault victims tuition reimbursement in
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: wake of the so-called Cornell 7 case.
• 17:01
  Speaker 4: I mean.
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: You know, last week I talked extensively about the idea
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: from New York's Governor Hochul to get rid of the
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: so-called loophole involving incapacitation and whether or not someone can
• 17:16
  Speaker 1: consent to sex. And I talked about how that's an
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: absolutely horrendous idea that would cause complete and total chaos
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: within the dating world, not to mention probably put bars
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: in New York City totally out of business. That idea
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: is a fantastic notion in comparison to this one. What
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: could possibly go wrong if you decide to give sexual
• 17:41
  Speaker 1: victims or victims of sexual assault tuition reimbursement? Gee, I
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: wonder whether or not allegations of sexual assault will go up. Gee,
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: especially given the cost of tuition these days. Gee, I wonder...
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: If you're going to get free tuition for making a
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: sex abuse claim or a sexual assault claim, whether or
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: not a woman will be more likely to make a
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: sexual assault claim. By the way, I referenced with the
• 18:13
  Speaker 1: loophole thing that bars would go out of business. In
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: that situation, why would any guy who had any sense
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: at all ever have sex with a woman on a
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: college campus? If there was literally maybe $ 100, 000- depending on
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: what school you're going to. I don't know whether or
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: not you get the full four years or one semester
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: or a full year. I don't know what it is,
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: but it's significant money. And we already know that within academia,
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: all allegations of sexual abuse are accepted as true. They
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: don't need logic. They don't need proof. They don't need evidence.
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: They don't need anything. You can change your mind now later.
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: You can reverse course. If you decide you don't like
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: the outcome of it, the guy wasn't nice to you afterwards,
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: or the sex wasn't good, or your friends called you
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: a slut, you can just change your mind. Doesn't matter.
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: Doesn't matter how long it takes. Doesn't matter how contradictory
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: your statements are. Boy, what a great fucking idea that is. Now,
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: Even I believe that that's not going to actually pass
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: in New York State. But that's an actual proposal by
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: a New York State lawmaker. Complete insanity. We've lost our minds.
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: That's like literally the definition of a moral panic. Also
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: within a moral panic, you see a lot of virtue signaling.
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: Virtue signaling is everywhere. It's a perfect sign. Of a
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: moral panic. And we have seen that in a couple
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: of different ways that I want to highlight on this,
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: the depth of journalism podcast, because they come from major
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: journalistic outlets and they're clear. politically motivated. Clearly, this is
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: in the context of a major midterm election and these
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: are liberal outlets, one, The Washington Post, the other, The
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: New York Times, that are desperately trying to promote a
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: narrative that makes this story goes beyond just young, crazy, progressive,
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: liberal females and get them all energized because they think
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: that there's this rape culture and that therefore they need
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: to get out and vote and vote against these mean,
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: nasty Republicans that have created this rape culture. That's, I think,
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: part of the motivation here, but, but What I'm about
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: to tell you about are two examples where the Post
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: and the New York Times, they want to expand the
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: reach of this narrative beyond just young women and getting
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: them out the boat. No, they want to go for
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: the moderate male, and specifically in the case of the
• 20:51
  Speaker 1: Washington Post, dads. Oh, this is a dad issue. And
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: then the Washington Post actually ran a story with the headline,
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: fathers are speaking up about the Cornell 7 case. Again,
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: to be clear, it's not the Cornell 7 case. It's
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: the Cornell 4. If you want to be, you know,
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: go by the actual evidence in this situation. But 7,
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: as I said previously, is an important number because 7
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: is well beyond the realm that anybody would think would
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: be rational for a college woman to... want to have
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: sex with in one night. I totally get that. Inherently,
• 21:28
  Speaker 1: she would be out of her right mind if she
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: did that. But that's not what happened. There were four
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: men in three separate threesomes over a very extended period
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: of time. And it seems to me as if she
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: consented and maybe even desired this to happen. But I'm
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: not going to let up on this idea of Cornell
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: 7 because it's the most obvious example of media malpractice
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: in this whole thing. But anyway, back to the Washington Post.
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: fathers are speaking up about the Cornell 7 case and
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: the importance of raising boys who might one day change
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: American society's deeply ingrained narratives surrounding masculinity and misogyny. They
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: represent a small but notable shift. In other words, basically
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: what happened was The Washington Post found some wussified men
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: who were virtue signaling on social media and wanted attention,
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: which they got because, you know, I'm sure there's a
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: lot of women that are looking for men out there
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: to say, see, see, we're right. These men are are
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: admitting that their side is wrong in this. We're right
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: about the Cornell 7. So you got a lot of
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: weak-kneed guys looking for social media clout and they post
• 22:45
  Speaker 1: videos that get some attention, get some traction. And so
• 22:49
  Speaker 1: the Washington Post wants to amplify that because they love
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: that narrative, especially just before a midterm election where there's
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: gonna be a massive gender gap and Republicans need there
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: to be a backlash among men. That's why this is
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: critical politically, because if there's going to be this energized
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: base of young progressive women for Republicans to have any
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: chance to hold their ground at all and not get
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: totally wiped out in a tsunami, there's going to have
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: to be men who go, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa,
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: hold on a second. This is going too far here.
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: I'm not happy with what's happening now. with Trump and
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: the Republican Congress sucks ass, but the alternative here is
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: really dangerous. And so the Washington Post has tried to
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: eat into that potentiality by promoting this idea that there
• 23:41
  Speaker 1: are fathers out there who get it and understand the
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: inherent problems of masculinity and misogyny in America. We've never
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: lived in a country maybe in the history of the world,
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: but certainly not in the history of America, where there's
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: been less of a problem with regard to toxic masculinity
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: and misogyny. It has been beaten the hell out of
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: for better or for worse. And I think some of
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: it's for better, some of it's for worse. It has
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: been beaten the hell out of the last two generations
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: of men. So this is, of all the problems we have,
• 24:18
  Speaker 1: this one ain't in the top 100, may not even
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: be in the top 1,000. But according to the Washington Post,
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: this is at the very top of the agenda. Now,
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: very similarly, we have the New York Times, where they
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: published a piece by David French, who supposedly is a conservative,
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: but he is like the most clearly virtue signaling, pussified
• 24:40
  Speaker 1: conservative on the planet. I don't even know how you
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: call him a conservative, but that's his MO. That's his brand.
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: He's the thinking man's conservative. And the New York Times
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: put out a piece which they publicized by saying, quote,
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: on the most traumatic night in a young woman's life,
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: a good man could not be found. Our columnist David
• 25:05
  Speaker 1: French writes about the Cornell University case. Well, at least
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: they didn't call it the Cornell 7 or the Cornell
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: gang rape. But Here's David Fredge, who, in my opinion,
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: either is ignoring or is completely ignorant of basic facts
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: in the case. Basic facts. Like, for instance, the thing
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: ended because of the men. There were men who literally said,
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: we're going to put a stop to whatever the hell
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: this is. So I don't even know what the hell
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: he's talking about. He's either, again, either ignoring facts or
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: ignorant of them. But this is pure virtue signaling. This
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: is say, where are the good men? This is attacking
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: men for a situation where the men may have just been,
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: may have just been giving the woman what she wanted.
• 25:54
  Speaker 1: I mean, that's a very plausible scenario here. So these men,
• 26:01
  Speaker 1: these are the worst men in America getting massive, almost
• 26:05
  Speaker 1: unprecedented amounts of media coverage and condemnation when it's quite
• 26:11
  Speaker 1: plausible based upon What we currently know, which is a
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: hell of a lot, in a situation that was already deeply, deeply,
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: deeply investigated by the authorities and by the university and
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: by a Title IX person, an incredibly deep investigation. Based
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: upon what we currently know, it is a very plausible
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: scenario that these guys basically were giving this woman what
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: she wanted until they themselves decided this thing had gone
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: too far. I'm not defending the guys. A lot of
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: bad decisions were made, especially regarding the stupid Snapchat messages
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: or whatever, where I think they were bragging about what
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: was happening. But I have seen no evidence whatsoever that
• 26:58
  Speaker 1: what occurred here was criminal. And I think there's a
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: scenario here that's actually the opposite. I mean, I really
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: do believe that the most logical Occam's Razor explanation for
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: what happened here is that this woman wanted this to happen,
• 27:19
  Speaker 1: or at least the guys thought that she wanted this
• 27:22
  Speaker 1: to happen. And guys being guys, especially at that age,
• 27:27
  Speaker 1: they're not going to give up an opportunity like this
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: for whatever reason. This woman wants to do this. Seems
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: like fun. Again, I'm not defending it. It was clearly
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: very stupid, especially in retrospect, and the drug part of
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: this was asinine. So I'm not defending anybody's actions. I'm
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: telling you, it's not criminal. And I'm telling you, the
• 27:45
  Speaker 1: more likely scenario here is that the woman at the
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: very least consented, if not actually facilitated the vast majority,
• 27:54
  Speaker 1: if not everything that transpired here. But that narrative or
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: that possibility, that scenario isn't even being considered now by
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: the news media. Instead, We have the absolutely surreal and
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: I think very telling scene that was on MSNOW where Epstein,
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: quote unquote, survivors are now standing in solidarity with Jane Doe.
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: And I thought, my God, is there any better example
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: of what an upside down world we live in than this?
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: where the Epstein survivors, because I think the Epstein files
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: and the so-called Cornell 7 case are the two most
• 28:37
  Speaker 1: overblown stories of and misunderstood, maybe misunderstood is a better
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: description than overblown, the two most misunderstood stories of 2026.
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: And it might not even be close. And I have
• 28:53
  Speaker 1: a contrarian view on the Epstein files, I'm confused as
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: to why more people, especially on the right, especially given
• 29:02
  Speaker 1: the Trump element of the story, don't have my view
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: of this. But I will say it one more time
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: for the record. I believe that what happened in the
• 29:12
  Speaker 1: Epstein story was that Epstein hired a lot of prostitutes,
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: some of whom were underage. I don't believe there was
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: any vast conspiracy for sex trafficking. And I think the
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: vast majority of what people think they believe about the
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: Epstein story is mythological. I've gone through many, many times
• 29:31
  Speaker 1: why I strongly believe that and why I think that
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: the Epstein files vindicate me on that, as does the
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: fact that not one person has ever been even charged
• 29:40
  Speaker 1: with anything criminally in the light, in the aftermath of
• 29:45
  Speaker 1: the Epstein files. And we've just completely forgotten about it.
• 29:48
  Speaker 1: And of course, the conspiracy theorists will tell you, well,
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: that's just because the conspiracy continues.
• 29:53
  Speaker 5: What?
• 29:55
  Speaker 4: Okay.
• 29:56
  Speaker 1: Anyway, the idea that the Epstein survivors, quote unquote, are
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: now in solidarity with Jane Doe is just so rich.
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: I mean, in so many ways, because I don't believe
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: any of them were physically raped. I don't think there's
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: any evidence that any of the so-called Epstein survivors, and
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: particularly Virginia Geoffrey, by the former Prince Andrew. I don't
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: believe that they were physically raped. Now, is it possible
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: that some of them had sex when they were underage
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: and then it was statutory rape? That's certainly possible. And
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: Epstein killed himself in a federal prison. I believe the
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: only logical explanation for that is that he knew he
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: was guilty of at least some of what he was
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: being charged with and that the gig was up. And
• 30:47
  Speaker 1: so I'm not in any way, shape or form saying
• 30:50
  Speaker 1: that there were no crimes committed there. I'm saying that
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: there's no evidence that I've seen that convinces me. And
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: by the way, a large part of that evidence is
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: the behavior of the so-called Epstein survivors, which is, in
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: my view, very inconsistent with the idea that these were
• 31:07
  Speaker 1: actual physical rape victims. And instead, that they are actually
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: people that manipulated this situation later on when they could
• 31:18
  Speaker 1: for a lot of money. because circumstances allowed that to happen. Well,
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: that's why I find it rather ironic in telling that
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: they're standing in solidarity with Jane Doe, because I think
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: Jane Doe is probably in a very similar set of
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: circumstances where she realized later on, wait a minute, I
• 31:35
  Speaker 1: can really make this work for me in a lot
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: of different ways. Now, it's not a perfect analogy. The
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: situations are very different in some significant fashion, but the
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: bottom line is still pretty much the same. And of course,
• 31:48
  Speaker 1: the media narrative is 100% the opposite of what I
• 31:50
  Speaker 1: just told you, which is the most logical explanation for
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: all of this and the one most consistent with the facts. Now,
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: I mentioned last week that there's an interesting thing going
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: on where attractive females who are commentators tend to be
• 32:08
  Speaker 1: far more likely to be telling you the truth about
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: what seemingly happened with the Cornell case than unattractive ones. Now,
• 32:18
  Speaker 1: there's a lot of reasons for that. There's clearly a
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: phenomenon where conservative commentators tend to be more attractive on
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: the female side than liberal commentators. I don't think that
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: that's even arguable. But I don't think that's the full
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: explanation for why we're seeing this on the Cornell case.
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: I went into great detail last week about why I
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: think that's the case. I think attractive women have a
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: very different view of men because their relationships with men
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: are very, very different. And I think they actually probably
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: have more of an insight into the way men actually
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: work in the real world in this kind of a
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: situation than unattractive women might. But even if I accept
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: the inherent bias of the fact that one, social media
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: favors attractive women and conservative women tend to be more
• 33:10
  Speaker 1: attractive and conservative women tend to get it on this
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: story far more than liberal women do, Even if I
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: accept all that, there's still, I think, something interesting going
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: on here. And maybe the most obvious example of this
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: is Megyn Kelly, who I have been very, very critical
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: of for a very long time for a lot of
• 33:31
  Speaker 1: different reasons. And there's no one who frustrates me more
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: on the issue of sex abuse allegations than Megyn Kelly,
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: because sometimes she really, really gets it. She seems to really,
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: really get it. on the Cornell case. And other times
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: she's completely and totally wrong, like she was with regard
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: to my friend Matt Lauer. I think she did Roger
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: Ailes dirty, who was a huge part of why she
• 33:56
  Speaker 1: became a star at Fox News Channel. She basically, as
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: I've said before, is a shapeshifter who will determine her
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: opinions and her positions on any topic based upon what
• 34:08
  Speaker 1: she thinks is best for her at the time, which
• 34:11
  Speaker 1: has really been proven with regard to her view on
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: Michael Jackson, which seems to change all the time. I've
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: even had email communications with Megyn Kelly's lawyer, Brian Friedman,
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: who was a Michael Jackson estate attorney that I met
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: with several years ago in the aftermath of the HBO
• 34:28
  Speaker 1: fake documentary, Leaving Neverland. And I've expressed confusion to Brian and,
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: And I think he's a little confused, too, as to
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: why she's so all over the map on Michael Jackson.
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: But on Cornell 7 and some other cases, she's actually
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: really good. Of course, she was very pro-Pete Hegseth, even
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: though the evidence against Pete Hegseth was way, way worse
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: when it came to rape than it was against Matt Lauer.
• 34:56
  Speaker 1: But it was in her interest to support Hegseth, and
• 35:00
  Speaker 1: she did. And it was in her interest to condemn
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: Matt Lauer because she was on a vendetta against NBC
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: who had fired her and she wanted to promote this
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: narrative of somehow NBC being a bastion of toxic masculinity
• 35:14
  Speaker 1: and a rape culture, which is just completely and totally ridiculous.
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: But Megyn Kelly has been dead on when it comes
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: to the Cornell case so far, and she's taken a
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: lot of heat. And she was particularly dead on because,
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: you know, again, this is partially why Megyn Kelly frustrates me,
• 35:31
  Speaker 1: because sometimes Megyn and I are 100% on the same page.
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: And we're 100% on the same page when it came
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: to something that happened on the Call Her Daddy podcast
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: regarding the Cornell case. Now, the Call Her Daddy podcast
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: has become exceedingly popular in the last several years among
• 35:52
  Speaker 1: young women. It's hosted by a in 2024, which is
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: really important because, of course, the Cornell thing happened in
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: October of 2024. No one in the news media wants
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: to put all this together, but here we are in
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: October of 2024, and Alex Cooper's Call Her Daddy podcast
• 36:16
  Speaker 1: is so popular that Kamala Harris is spending a ton
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: of money to do a fake studio as the setting
• 36:24
  Speaker 1: for for an episode of the Call Her Daddy podcast,
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: one of the very few interviews that she did, extensive
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: interviews that she did while she was running for president.
• 36:36
  Speaker 1: So that's how big Alex Cooper and Call Her Daddy
• 36:40
  Speaker 1: was at the very exact time period in which this
• 36:44
  Speaker 1: event happened. And why is this relevant to Cornell 7? Well,
• 36:48
  Speaker 1: for a couple reasons. Number one is that nobody, nobody
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: had more influence at that time, and maybe still today,
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: over the way college-age women were viewing sexuality and what's
• 37:04
  Speaker 1: appropriate in the sexual realm and what they might even
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: want to be desirous of in the sexual realm more
• 37:12
  Speaker 1: than Alex Cooper. I mean, again, I think sometimes the
• 37:17
  Speaker 1: influence of these type of people can be overestimated. For instance,
• 37:22
  Speaker 1: this is an off-the-wall example, but I thought Taylor Swift
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: was going to have more of an influence over the
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: 2024 election than she apparently did, although she really didn't
• 37:29
  Speaker 1: do very much at all for Kamala Harris. But I
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: don't want to get sidetracked. But even understanding that sometimes
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: the influence of these people can be overestimated. By all measures,
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: Alex Cooper, with the very demographic that Jane Doe was
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: a part of in 2024, had enormous influence. And she
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: was openly, openly promoting this exact kind of behavior as
• 37:59
  Speaker 1: not only being acceptable and appropriate, but essentially being the
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: ultimate for college-age women. I mean, I'm not exaggerating. She
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: was promoting this kind of behavior. Now, this is part
• 38:16
  Speaker 1: of why I think The identity of Jane Doe is important.
• 38:20
  Speaker 1: We can learn so much from someone's identity. Was she
• 38:23
  Speaker 1: a fan of the Call Her Daddy podcast? I have
• 38:26
  Speaker 1: no idea if she was or not, but I think
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: there's a darn good chance she was. And if she was,
• 38:31
  Speaker 1: that would be exceedingly relevant because now we would have
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: even more of an indication that she probably not only consented,
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: but maybe facilitated this entire situation. because that is the
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: mentality and the worldview of the entire Alex Cooper call
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: her daddy phenomenon. Now, why is that relevant to what's
• 38:54
  Speaker 1: happening in the last week? Well, Alex Cooper had on
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: a professor from Cornell, a liberal feminist, and effectively took
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: the side of Jane Doe, 100%, condemning, of course, the
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: Cornell 7, with absolutely no self-awareness, no accountability whatsoever. And
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: just to give you a sense of just how ludicrous
• 39:23
  Speaker 1: this became and why it is that Megyn Kelly rightfully
• 39:26
  Speaker 1: attacked Alex Cooper. Now, of course, I think Megyn Kelly
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: might have some... other issues with regard to, you know,
• 39:31
  Speaker 1: she's an aging, beautiful woman and Alex Cooper is a younger,
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: beautiful woman. I think there's inherent rivalries going on there
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: in Megyn's mind, because I do think that that motivates
• 39:43
  Speaker 1: a lot of what Megyn comments on. I really do
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: believe that it must be very, very, very, very, very
• 39:50
  Speaker 1: difficult to be a beautiful woman as Megyn Kelly is
• 39:53
  Speaker 1: and to start going on the downhill slide and holding
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: on for dear life. I think that probably messes with
• 39:59
  Speaker 1: your head. And I think that's part of why Megyn
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: Kelly has lost her goddamn mind. And I do think
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: it motivates her in some of the commentary that she provides.
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: And it may have something to do with why she
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: went after Alex Cooper. But I'll allow it in this
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: particular situation because Alex Cooper is at the very height
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: of hypocrisy here when you can make a very strong
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: argument that she may have actually helped facilitate this situation
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: where she's now condemning it. And just to give you
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: a sense of why I think this is significant and
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: what that show with the feminist professor from Cornell was
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: all about, here they are celebrating the fact that this
• 40:41
  Speaker 1: event at Cornell may provoke a new Me Too movement.
• 40:46
  Speaker 1: We already had one, which I guess we just forgot about.
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: We just forgot about the fact that we already went
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: through this in 2017, that these guys at Cornell, they
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: would have been early teenagers learning about love and sexuality
• 41:02
  Speaker 1: in the environment of Me Too, which doesn't make a
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: hell of a lot of sense for the narrative that
• 41:06
  Speaker 1: we're now all supposed to believe. But we're going to
• 41:08
  Speaker 1: have a new Me Too movement, and Alex Cooper, of
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: all people, is celebrating that with a feminist professor from Cornell.
• 41:18
  Speaker 6: I'm curious if you think that we could be witnessing
• 41:22
  Speaker 6: the beginning of another Me Too movement.
• 41:25
  Speaker 4: I do think that it feels like this really incredible
• 41:29
  Speaker 4: momentum that, you know, thanks to those brilliant student journalists,
• 41:34
  Speaker 4: Cerise and Sophia have really started something that feels like
• 41:39
  Speaker 4: another powerful way in which women are coming together and
• 41:43
  Speaker 4: recognizing their ability to to protest unjust treatment. So I
• 41:50
  Speaker 4: do think we're seeing that.
• 41:51
  Speaker 6: I'm curious if you think that we could be witnessing
• 41:55
  Speaker 6: the beginning of another Me Too movement.
• 41:58
  Speaker 4: I do think that. It feels like this really incredible
• 42:02
  Speaker 4: momentum that, you know, thanks to those brilliant student journalists,
• 42:07
  Speaker 4: Cerise and Sophia have really started something that feels like
• 42:13
  Speaker 4: another powerful way in which women are coming together. and
• 42:17
  Speaker 4: recognizing their ability to protest unjust treatment. So I do
• 42:23
  Speaker 4: think we're seeing that.
• 42:25
  Speaker 1: Now, it's not just Alex Cooper's hypocrisy on what is
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: at this point a theoretical connection between her popularity and
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: her commentary and helping to theoretically facilitate what transpired at
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: Cornell with this botched orgy. It's Alex Cooper's own history
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: with regard to allegations, I believe false allegations. In fact,
• 42:54
  Speaker 1: I don't even think that's a stretch. I shouldn't even
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: say my opinion. Basically proven to be false allegations of
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: sexual abuse that she has been involved with herself. This
• 43:07
  Speaker 1: is a woman who tried to destroy her former soccer
• 43:10
  Speaker 1: coach at Boston University with a documentary claiming sexual abuse.
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: And it failed because in a very rare circumstance, the
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: coach got so much support from current and former players
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: that essentially the thing went nowhere. But she tried to
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: have her Me Too movement and it failed. And she
• 43:33
  Speaker 1: somehow survived that. I don't know how she survived that.
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: That should be the end for someone like that. You
• 43:39
  Speaker 1: make an allegation like that that is based on no
• 43:43
  Speaker 1: evidence and and gets completely shouted down against self-interest and
• 43:49
  Speaker 1: against what we've seen happen so many other times, that
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: ought to be the end, but we don't live in
• 43:54
  Speaker 1: that world anymore. But to me, maybe even a more
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: clear-cut situation occurred when Alex Cooper, she comes out with
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: this book, she does an interview, only a couple of interviews,
• 44:07
  Speaker 1: and she, and actually she, I can't remember if she
• 44:09
  Speaker 1: had a book or whatever, but the point is Dave
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: Portnoy from Barstool Sports used to be her boss. And
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: Dave Portnoy wrote in his book that Alex Cooper, during
• 44:22
  Speaker 1: negotiations to get out of her contract, threatened him that
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: she was going to make a sex abuse allegation against
• 44:31
  Speaker 1: Barstool Sports. Clearly made up. Hey, Dave, I'm a pretty girl.
• 44:38
  Speaker 1: Barstool has, I'm paraphrasing, but this is, I'm sure, very
• 44:41
  Speaker 1: close to what happened. You know, Barstool has this reputation
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: for being a bunch of guys, young guys. Everyone's going
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: to believe I was sexually abused or harassed, what have you.
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: And if you don't let me out of my contract,
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: I'm going to sue you. And Portnoy put that in
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: his book. And in an interview on CNBC, Cooper was
• 45:04
  Speaker 1: asked about this and didn't even come close to denying it.
• 45:07
  Speaker 1: She didn't even deny it. And so here we have
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: a woman who has a history of threatening and making
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: false sex abuse claims whose show may have facilitated, at
• 45:24
  Speaker 1: least in some way, shape, or form, what happened at Cornell.
• 45:28
  Speaker 1: And now she's backing 100% the rape narrative, which is
• 45:33
  Speaker 1: likely a false allegation of sexual assault. And this is
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: one of the most popular commentators among young women in
• 45:42
  Speaker 1: the entire country, if not the most popular. It's just,
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: it's unbelievable to me. It's unbelievable how the hell we
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: got here. And the moral panic is not stopping at Cornell.
• 45:54
  Speaker 1: This is becoming very much like Penn State. That's why
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: I'm convinced that these guys are in big, big trouble,
• 46:00
  Speaker 1: regardless of what the truth is. The Cornell president, well,
• 46:03
  Speaker 1: he hasn't been fired yet. He's eventually going to get
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: fired because he's curling up in the fetal position. He's
• 46:09
  Speaker 1: 100% backing the mob. He's terrified of the mob. And
• 46:14
  Speaker 1: now he has actually canceled all frat parties at Cornell.
• 46:19
  Speaker 1: That's right. Because of something that may have happened that
• 46:22
  Speaker 1: might have been totally consensual two years ago. If you're
• 46:25
  Speaker 1: in a frat at Cornell now, you cannot have a party.
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: I mean, as absurd as this is, as unjust as
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: this is, part of me was actually, okay, fine, great.
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: I'm glad these people are going to suffer for their
• 46:41
  Speaker 1: own stupidity. Because there are going to be some people
• 46:45
  Speaker 1: at Cornell that are going to go, what the fuck
• 46:47
  Speaker 1: is this? Why are we being made to suffer for
• 46:50
  Speaker 1: something that we didn't do? But that's the way academia works.
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: That's how virtue signaling works. That's how a moral panic works.
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: That's what happens when you curl up into the fetal position.
• 47:01
  Speaker 1: You must signal your virtue and do things that make
• 47:05
  Speaker 1: no sense and punish people that did nothing wrong. And
• 47:08
  Speaker 1: the best commentary I've seen about this comes from a
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: woman by the name of Heather McDonald. If you don't
• 47:13
  Speaker 1: know who Heather McDonald is, you should find out who
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: she is because she has a lot of really interesting
• 47:18
  Speaker 1: and intelligent things to say. She's a fellow at the
• 47:22
  Speaker 1: Manhattan Institute, which is a think tank. But she's very
• 47:26
  Speaker 1: much into this whole concept of fighting back against the
• 47:30
  Speaker 1: absurdity of feminism from a feminist perspective. And she wrote
• 47:35
  Speaker 1: something on X. I don't usually do this, but I
• 47:37
  Speaker 1: think this is worthy of being shared on the podcast.
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: She wrote, one could say that Cornell is infantilizing its
• 47:46
  Speaker 1: female students. Their president, following up on his maudlin video
• 47:51
  Speaker 1: performance of October 3rd, has just banned all fraternity social
• 47:56
  Speaker 1: events for the remainder of the academic year. Doing so
• 48:00
  Speaker 1: is necessary, the president, who's a straight white male, of course,
• 48:04
  Speaker 1: older straight white male, so he's exceedingly vulnerable on this,
• 48:07
  Speaker 1: said this was needed to strengthen campus safety. Why would
• 48:14
  Speaker 1: You ought to be fired for that. Your campus isn't
• 48:18
  Speaker 1: safe enough for people to have parties because of a
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: rape culture? How the hell did that happen? You should
• 48:24
  Speaker 1: be fired. Those are my words, not McDonald's. Back to
• 48:27
  Speaker 1: what she wrote. This measure is wildly over-inclusive. The number of, quote,
• 48:34
  Speaker 1: sexual assaults— we will merely bracket the term for the moment—
• 48:39
  Speaker 1: that would have come out of the dozens of future
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: frat gatherings is minute to non-existent. The more efficient measure
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: would have been to let females evaluate the risk of attending,
• 48:54
  Speaker 1: and if they decide the risk is too high, boycott
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: the parties. Or don't show up roaring drunk. Or don't
• 49:03
  Speaker 1: get into bed with a guy whom you have no
• 49:06
  Speaker 1: deep relationship with. Or don't get into bed with a
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: guy at all unless you are engaged or, God forbid, married.
• 49:16
  Speaker 1: But the president is implicitly right about one thing. He
• 49:21
  Speaker 1: is presiding over a bunch of helpless, nauseatingly self-pitying co-eds
• 49:28
  Speaker 1: who eschew all personal agency and who thus appear to
• 49:32
  Speaker 1: need Cornell's intercession. Cornell's females expect everyone other than themselves,
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: to safeguard them. I thought that was tremendous. Because as
• 49:46
  Speaker 1: the father of two young women, girls, 14 and nine,
• 49:53
  Speaker 1: one of whom I'm going to talk about later in
• 49:54
  Speaker 1: this podcast in an absolutely batshit crazy situation that has
• 49:57
  Speaker 1: occurred on social media, I absolutely want them to be
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: able to fight for themselves, stand up for themselves. I
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: want them to be treated equally. As I said, on
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: the News Nation appearance. I want them to be treated fairly.
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: But the idea that we are infantilizing, and that's the
• 50:16
  Speaker 1: right word, we are infantilizing in so many ways young
• 50:20
  Speaker 1: women is outrageous. It should be infuriating to actual real feminists.
• 50:29
  Speaker 1: I mean, the Lindsay Clancy case is a really good example.
• 50:33
  Speaker 1: And what's happened now in the aftermath of the whole
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: Cornell story is another really good example. And there are
• 50:41
  Speaker 1: other examples I'm about to get to. I mean, this
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: is happening society-wide. In the name of feminism, we are
• 50:48
  Speaker 1: treating women like infants who are incapable of making their
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: own decisions, and we must punish everyone to make sure
• 50:58
  Speaker 1: that we don't provide any opportunity for women to be
• 51:01
  Speaker 1: able to make their own decisions. And I thought what
• 51:04
  Speaker 1: McDonald said there was absolutely fantastic. Now, I think this
• 51:10
  Speaker 1: is definitely in the realm of the infantilizing of women
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: with regard to Cornell as well, because I want to
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: play a clip from CNN. This is Erin Burnett, who
• 51:21
  Speaker 1: is a very liberal, middle-aged female host on CNN. And
• 51:27
  Speaker 1: she's talking to a New York Times reporter. And to me,
• 51:30
  Speaker 1: this is such an incredibly amazing and telling clip because
• 51:36
  Speaker 1: it shows just how utterly impossible it is. Once the
• 51:41
  Speaker 1: news media has become invested in a narrative, especially in
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: the realm of sexual abuse, for them to ever reverse course,
• 51:50
  Speaker 1: because they will see everything through the prism of guilt.
• 51:55
  Speaker 1: I saw this happen 101 times in the Sandusky case.
• 51:59
  Speaker 1: They determine guilt. So then every piece of information, they
• 52:03
  Speaker 1: rush to judgment. That's a key part of this whole thing.
• 52:06
  Speaker 1: They rush to judgment. Then the facts start to come in.
• 52:10
  Speaker 1: But since they've already determined guilt, they see the facts
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: through the prism of guilt. And I could not have
• 52:16
  Speaker 1: possibly imagined a more clear-cut example, a more dangerous example
• 52:23
  Speaker 1: of this kind of lunacy than this conversation here between
• 52:28
  Speaker 1: Aaron Burnett and another middle-aged white female reporter from the
• 52:33
  Speaker 1: New York Times. Because in a rational world, even a
• 52:37
  Speaker 1: remotely rational world, what you're about to hear, the revelations
• 52:41
  Speaker 1: regarding how it is that Jane Doe came to change
• 52:45
  Speaker 1: her mind. You probably heard the term evolve, that her
• 52:52
  Speaker 1: perception of the night evolved. Well, evolved in this situation
• 52:59
  Speaker 1: means she changed her mind because her self-interest changed. Lots
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: of things happened. There was no relationship with any of
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: the guys. She got disinvited to the frat for a
• 53:11
  Speaker 1: Halloween party. Her reputation was destroyed within Cornell and people
• 53:16
  Speaker 1: were saying nasty things on social media. So her self-interest
• 53:20
  Speaker 1: changed and she realized she had other options. There was
• 53:26
  Speaker 1: an option here for her to salvage this situation. And
• 53:30
  Speaker 1: the option was to become the victim. That's how a
• 53:34
  Speaker 1: rational person would perceive the revelations that these two women
• 53:40
  Speaker 1: on CNN are about to discuss. You're about to hear
• 53:44
  Speaker 1: them discuss, but that's not how they perceive it. They
• 53:47
  Speaker 1: perceive it in a completely 180 degree different way because
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: they're already invested in guilt. So now they must infantilize
• 53:58
  Speaker 1: this woman and, Because weeks later, she has to not
• 54:03
  Speaker 1: realize that she was raped. And she has to be
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: convinced that she was raped by people that were not
• 54:09
  Speaker 1: involved in what happened. She was there. By her own account,
• 54:15
  Speaker 1: she was never intoxicated more than an 8 out of 10.
• 54:20
  Speaker 1: Most of it, she was a 5 or a 6.
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: By her own account, she was never incapacitated. She remembers
• 54:27
  Speaker 1: exceedingly well. strong details that I've documented many times in
• 54:32
  Speaker 1: the past, weeks later. So she must be infantilized because
• 54:39
  Speaker 1: she's so weak, so stupid that she doesn't understand what
• 54:43
  Speaker 1: happened to her. But no, no, this is natural. This
• 54:46
  Speaker 1: is actually a good thing that she was convinced by
• 54:50
  Speaker 1: people that weren't there, other females who better understood because
• 54:55
  Speaker 1: they apparently, with no evidence whatsoever, have been abused by Men,
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: you're going to hear that in this conversation. So we're
• 55:02
  Speaker 1: just going to accept the idea that she misunderstood what
• 55:06
  Speaker 1: happened to her. And it wasn't until she got educated later.
• 55:10
  Speaker 1: That's not what happened, by the way. She wasn't educated.
• 55:13
  Speaker 1: Her self-interest got shifted for a lot of different reasons.
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: One of which was she didn't like the fact that
• 55:19
  Speaker 1: her reputation was destroyed and that women were saying these
• 55:22
  Speaker 1: nasty things about her. So she decided, you know what?
• 55:26
  Speaker 1: Maybe I have another option. Her friends and probably a
• 55:29
  Speaker 1: therapist convinced her she had another option. And then a
• 55:32
  Speaker 1: lawyer convinced her she really has another option. Not only
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: can you save your reputation by becoming a victim, not
• 55:38
  Speaker 1: only can you punish these guys because they didn't treat
• 55:41
  Speaker 1: you the way that you wanted to after this, but
• 55:43
  Speaker 1: you're going to make a boatload of money because Cornell's
• 55:45
  Speaker 1: got a cave like every academic institution does in this situation.
• 55:50
  Speaker 1: So with that setup, here is what I found to
• 55:52
  Speaker 1: be an incredibly telling and also frankly infuriating and depressing
• 55:59
  Speaker 1: and scary conversation because under this set of rules, it
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: is absolutely impossible, impossible to ever come to the truthful
• 56:10
  Speaker 1: conclusion in a set of circumstances like this once the
• 56:13
  Speaker 1: news media has become invested and now they see everything
• 56:16
  Speaker 1: through the prism of their own preferred narrative. And here's
• 56:20
  Speaker 1: what that sounded like on CNN.
• 56:23
  Speaker 7: She's looking at an online forum. about a week after
• 56:26
  Speaker 7: it happened, and she sees a post about the fraternity
• 56:28
  Speaker 7: where someone writes, they do drugs and gang raped a sophomore,
• 56:32
  Speaker 7: report them. And that moment was the moment for her?
• 56:37
  Speaker 1: It was one of the moments.
• 56:38
  Speaker 5: If you look at the documents and you put them
• 56:40
  Speaker 5: together and you trace them, her interview with investigators from
• 56:43
  Speaker 5: the school, plus text messages that she exchanged with her
• 56:46
  Speaker 5: friends and with guys, and then also interviews with the
• 56:48
  Speaker 5: women who were around her that she was confiding in,
• 56:50
  Speaker 5: you can see this arc where her understanding started to change.
• 56:54
  Speaker 5: And that moment when she saw that post was a
• 56:56
  Speaker 5: key moment. It wasn't the only moment. Nothing is ever
• 56:59
  Speaker 5: that simple in cases like this.
• 57:00
  Speaker 1: Not that black and white.
• 57:01
  Speaker 5: But after she saw that post, she later told investigators,
• 57:04
  Speaker 5: I have it in front of me, she said, that
• 57:06
  Speaker 5: was the first time I'd ever heard the narrative change
• 57:08
  Speaker 5: that I wasn't a whore and that I was assaulted.
• 57:11
  Speaker 5: And she told investigators that. When she saw someone else
• 57:14
  Speaker 5: describe what happened to her as a gang rape, it
• 57:16
  Speaker 5: appears when you put the pieces together that she finally
• 57:19
  Speaker 5: allowed herself to consider, wait, Was it a gang rape?
• 57:22
  Speaker 5: And then grapple with what that might mean and what
• 57:24
  Speaker 5: she would have to do with that knowledge.
• 57:26
  Speaker 7: You're also learning about the morning right after it happened,
• 57:29
  Speaker 7: which obviously is prior to the realization that you just
• 57:32
  Speaker 7: spoke about there, but the morning after. What did her
• 57:35
  Speaker 7: roommates tell investigators about that?
• 57:37
  Speaker 5: So it's very interesting to read these interviews. She has
• 57:39
  Speaker 5: two female roommates. She also has a big sister, like
• 57:41
  Speaker 5: a mentor at her sorority, who was also interviewed. And
• 57:44
  Speaker 5: they all told investigators they were talking with her about
• 57:47
  Speaker 5: the events of the night of October 19th. And for
• 57:49
  Speaker 5: these three women who hadn't been through this traumatic event
• 57:52
  Speaker 5: and who all had had their own bad experiences with
• 57:54
  Speaker 5: men in their lives, they understood, or at least they
• 57:57
  Speaker 5: told investigators, they understood that she was not being honest
• 58:01
  Speaker 5: with herself about what had transpired. One of them said
• 58:04
  Speaker 5: it seemed like she was in shock. She was not
• 58:06
  Speaker 5: really understanding the gravity of what she was saying. So
• 58:09
  Speaker 5: she was describing the sex acts. She was describing the ketamine,
• 58:12
  Speaker 5: the intoxication, the men. But she wasn't putting it together
• 58:15
  Speaker 5: to say, wait, Maybe I didn't actually consent. Maybe I
• 58:18
  Speaker 5: couldn't consent. She wasn't able to get to that point yet.
• 58:22
  Speaker 1: Again, I just can't even describe how telling that exchange was.
• 58:28
  Speaker 1: Because that's what happens. This is why the media is
• 58:32
  Speaker 1: so totally broken on this issue in particular. Sexual abuse.
• 58:38
  Speaker 1: Because the media, especially CNN, is run by liberal females.
• 58:47
  Speaker 1: Cannot emphasize that enough. The legacy media in general is
• 58:51
  Speaker 1: run by liberal females, and they're very invested in this topic,
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: and they will rationalize anything they possibly can, even if
• 59:03
  Speaker 1: it means infantilizing their own gender. But that's what they
• 59:06
  Speaker 1: just did to Jane Doe. They infantilized her. She is
• 59:10
  Speaker 1: so dumb, so weak, so incapable that she doesn't even
• 59:15
  Speaker 1: understand what happened to herself. And she needs to be
• 59:19
  Speaker 1: saved by these other women who weren't even fucking there,
• 59:22
  Speaker 1: who have no idea what the actual facts were or
• 59:25
  Speaker 1: the reality is. And oh, by the way, the so-called
• 59:27
  Speaker 1: Cornell 7 incident Their testimony, their words mean nothing because
• 59:31
  Speaker 1: we've already decided they're guilty and therefore, you know, they're liars.
• 59:36
  Speaker 1: They have to be liars. They're terrible people. They're frat boys,
• 59:39
  Speaker 1: even though they're not white, all of them. But we
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: know they're the bad guys. We know who the good
• 59:44
  Speaker 1: guys are. We know who the bad guys are. And
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: now we're just going to rationalize any information we get
• 59:50
  Speaker 1: through that prism. And when it comes to Erin Burnett,
• 59:54
  Speaker 1: part of the reason why I played this clip from
• 59:55
  Speaker 1: Erin Burnett is that she becomes relevant to another story
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 1: of alleged sexual assault. One that you may not have
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 1: heard of. And the fact that you haven't maybe heard
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 1: of it yet, I think is very telling and very
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 1: relevant because especially in light of the fact that we're
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 1: supposedly living in this horrible rape culture and all the
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 1: publicity that the Cornell case has gotten, you would think
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 1: that the story I'm about to tell you about would
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 1: be known by every American. Because it is extraordinary. And
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 1: it is scary. And it is horrible. It is horrific.
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 1: And it is relevant to the midterm elections because there
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 1: is a Democrat congressional candidate in Arizona running against a
• 1:00:45
  Speaker 1: Republican incumbent in a red district, which I think is
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 1: relevant to all this. And her name is Bernadette Green Palencia.
• 1:00:55
  Speaker 1: And she... was the subject of an article in a
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 1: liberal rag, for lack of a better term, in Arizona
• 1:01:05
  Speaker 1: last week, where the story, and it was stated as
• 1:01:09
  Speaker 1: a fact, was stated as a 100% stole cold fact
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 1: in the headline that she was raped. She was raped,
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 1: not by just one guy, but by two guys. She
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 1: was raped horribly. in public, outside, in the middle of
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 1: the night, while she was fixing her campaign yard signs,
• 1:01:38
  Speaker 1: which she apparently did on a regular basis and did
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 1: so at night because it's a lot cooler, obviously, at
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 1: nighttime in Arizona this time of year. So the story
• 1:01:49
  Speaker 1: that was told in this liberal rag that I'd never
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 1: heard of before in Arizona in great, horrible, horrific detail.
• 1:02:00
  Speaker 1: Not one, but two men of which she has no description,
• 1:02:05
  Speaker 1: literally almost zero description. They attack her. They have sex
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 1: with her. They denigrate the sex with her. They may
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 1: or may not have referred to her as a Democrat
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 1: in their, their very derisive words that they used about her.
• 1:02:24
  Speaker 1: She can't be sure because it's a lot of, A
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 1: lot of this is a blur, but they rape her
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 1: and they leave. And, and this is just, I mean, horrible.
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 1: I mean, you would think that if for no other reason,
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 1: we need to find these assholes and we need to
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 1: get them in prison because there are two very, very, very,
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 1: very dangerous men on the loose in Arizona. I mean,
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 1: if I'm going to, accept this story like the Arizona
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 1: liberal rag did is a hundred percent true, then why
• 1:02:58
  Speaker 1: the fuck are we not doing everything we possibly can
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 1: to find these assholes and put them behind bars? Because
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: that is a, those are two very dangerous guys. I mean,
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 1: if two guys are willing to find a woman on
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 1: the side of a road in a non-rural area, a
• 1:03:17
  Speaker 1: very well populated, yes, it's apparently the middle of the night,
• 1:03:20
  Speaker 1: but a very well populated area with lots of seemingly
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 1: security cameras all around, if they're willing to just beat
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 1: this woman over the head and sexually rape her, both
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 1: of them, outside in a very populated area, my God,
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 1: those are dangerous people. I mean, those dudes need to
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 1: be found because who the hell knows what else they're
• 1:03:49
  Speaker 1: going to do or what they've already done. So this
• 1:03:52
  Speaker 1: is a matter of extreme urgency. And so when the
• 1:03:59
  Speaker 1: article came out, I'm like, well, let's find these assholes.
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 1: By the way, when did this happen? Because this article
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 1: came out last week. I'm curious. I'm always very curious
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 1: about the timeline on these things. The timeline, I think,
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 1: can always tell you an awful lot. And the timeline
• 1:04:17
  Speaker 1: was rather interesting on this because the actual event occurred
• 1:04:22
  Speaker 1: August 14th. I'm like, what? We're in the middle of
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 1: October now. August 14th? This happened August 14th. And we're
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 1: just hearing about it now? A congressional candidate was brutally
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 1: raped on the side of the road? And we're just
• 1:04:45
  Speaker 1: hearing about it now. So when did the police get
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 1: told about this? Well, That's interesting. It wasn't August 15th, 14th, 15th, 16th.
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 1: It was August 31st. August 31st. August 31st. A congressional
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 1: candidate gets raped and doesn't tell police about this until
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 1: two weeks later. More than two weeks later. That seems
• 1:05:17
  Speaker 1: rather odd.
• 1:05:19
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 1:05:19
  Speaker 1: Okay. Well, did she tell anybody else about it? Well,
• 1:05:25
  Speaker 1: according to the story in this liberal rag in Arizona,
• 1:05:28
  Speaker 1: she actually went missing for a couple of days after
• 1:05:32
  Speaker 1: the 14th. I believe on the 14th and 15th, I
• 1:05:36
  Speaker 1: don't think anybody close to her knew where she was
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 1: until at least, I think, late on the 16th. Might
• 1:05:44
  Speaker 1: even have been the 17th, but it was in that realm.
• 1:05:46
  Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, she missed a campaign event
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 1: because that was a weekend. So she misses a campaign event,
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 1: and she's gone? She's missing? For two days. Okay, well,
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 1: this must have been because of the trauma of the rape.
• 1:06:02
  Speaker 1: I mean, that's understandable, right? I mean, who the hell
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 1: knows how anyone's going to react? So once you come back,
• 1:06:10
  Speaker 1: you immediately tell everyone what happened, and then you go
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 1: to the police, right? Well, the police part of this,
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 1: for some reason, was not in the equation. There was
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 1: no rape kit administered to her because it was too late.
• 1:06:25
  Speaker 1: She apparently washed the clothes that she was wearing at
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 1: the time. She, by the way, doesn't even really know
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 1: exactly where this happened. She only knows the general vicinity
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 1: of where it happened. Okay. She got hit over the head.
• 1:06:37
  Speaker 1: It's the concussion. You know, this is why she has
• 1:06:40
  Speaker 1: a very vague memory of only brief flashes of what
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 1: apparently transpired. And so a lot of this is very strange.
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 1: I mean, Hard to understand how this could possibly be.
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: How is it that we're learning about this from a
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 1: liberal rag in the middle of October when she's running
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 1: a race in a Republican district in Arizona for Congress?
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is a huge story, right? I mean,
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 1: this is unprecedented. This is horrendous, horrific. It should give
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 1: everyone chills. And again, we need to find these bastards
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 1: to put them behind bars. Of course, if you haven't
• 1:07:28
  Speaker 1: already figured out, I'm at least a little bit skeptical
• 1:07:31
  Speaker 1: of a story like this. So I start to dive in.
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 1: And I read that liberal rag article several times. And
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 1: there's always, in situations like this, there's always some red flags. Again,
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to claim I know what the hell
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 1: happened here. But there's some red flags and it's not
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 1: just the delay in reporting. It's not just no identification
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 1: of the two guys. It's not just the narrative is
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 1: awfully strange. It's not just the fact that you don't
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 1: even know the location where this transpired. It's not just
• 1:08:08
  Speaker 1: that you then disappeared for a couple of days. There's
• 1:08:12
  Speaker 1: other stuff that I think if you use your brain
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 1: and if you had any curiosity about and any imagination,
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 1: and you had an ability to look at other possible
• 1:08:24
  Speaker 1: alternative scenarios that were consistent with basic logic, and the
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 1: media does not have this ability, especially in the realm
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 1: of sexual abuse, that you might start asking some serious questions.
• 1:08:36
  Speaker 1: The first thing that got my curiosity up as I
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 1: read the article in the Liberal Rag which declared unequivocally
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 1: that she was raped, is that they had a quote
• 1:08:49
  Speaker 1: from the husband. She's married. And the husband says about
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: her two-day disappearance that he was actually confused concerned and insecure,
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 1: I believe is the word he used, because he felt
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 1: like she might be hiding something from him. That's the husband.
• 1:09:12
  Speaker 1: The husband. And who the hell knows what he actually
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 1: told the liberal rag, but that's what the liberal rag
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 1: that is deeply invested in this whole story being true,
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 1: that's what they reported. So I can't even imagine what
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 1: he actually said for them to be willing to put
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 1: that in the story. Now they catched it. They made
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 1: it seem like he had realized that that was a
• 1:09:38
  Speaker 1: mistake and that he almost, I think you're supposed to
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 1: perceive this as, He's blaming himself for not immediately being
• 1:09:46
  Speaker 1: 100% supportive of her, but he expresses that he was
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 1: confused and hurt and felt like she might be hiding
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 1: something from him. Okay, doesn't prove anything, but let's put
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 1: a marker down on that. Let's put a little circle
• 1:10:06
  Speaker 1: on that because that's interesting. That opens up a whole
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 1: series of theoretical Alternative scenarios. Again, doesn't prove anything. Just
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 1: one little data point. So I mentioned Erin Burnett. Erin
• 1:10:21
  Speaker 1: Burnett obviously is not the place you're going to go
• 1:10:25
  Speaker 1: if you're expecting a hard-hitting interview with a sex abuse victim. However,
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 1: she is exactly where you're going to go if you
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 1: don't want a hard-hitting interview and you want to be
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 1: treated as a victim with no actual difficult questions. And
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 1: so I found it very interesting and relevant that Bernadette
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: Green Palencia decided to do an interview with Aaron Burnett
• 1:10:49
  Speaker 1: on CNN, the very same Aaron Burnett you just heard
• 1:10:52
  Speaker 1: in that nauseating clip about the Cornell quote-unquote seven case.
• 1:10:57
  Speaker 1: And this interview was unbelievably soft. I mean, unbelievably soft.
• 1:11:02
  Speaker 1: It 100% accepted as true the idea that she was
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 1: raped and there's no other possibility plausible alternative scenario here
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 1: and that all the weirdness of her story really doesn't
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 1: need to be examined. And oh, by the way, we
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 1: don't even need to mention, this is to me the
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 1: most obvious case of media malpractice. I mean, there's lots,
• 1:11:25
  Speaker 1: but this is the most obvious. How do you not
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 1: at least get to the bottom of the two-day disappearance?
• 1:11:31
  Speaker 1: Because the two-day disappearance is potentially key to understanding this
• 1:11:37
  Speaker 1: whole situation. And Aaron Burnett, I don't even think mentions
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 1: in her interview with this congressional candidate, this person alleging
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 1: this horrific two-man rape, I don't even think she mentions
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 1: the two-day disappearance or the missing of a campaign event.
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 1: Doesn't even mention it. Forget about getting to the bottom
• 1:11:57
  Speaker 1: of it. But sometimes softball interviews are actually the most
• 1:12:04
  Speaker 1: dangerous for people making allegations. the best example I can
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 1: come up with, and especially for people who are listeners
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 1: to my podcast and the death of, not just the
• 1:12:18
  Speaker 1: death of journalism, but with the benefit of hindsight, I
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 1: always go back to Chris Cuomo and Aaron Fisher, victim
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 1: number one in the Jerry Sandusky case. Because Aaron Fisher,
• 1:12:28
  Speaker 1: I believe, says a lot of things in that interview
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: with Chris Cuomo, where Chris Cuomo is 100% on his side,
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 1: that if you examine them with any sort of a
• 1:12:38
  Speaker 1: critical mind, you go, wait a minute, That's a smoking
• 1:12:41
  Speaker 1: gun that Aaron Fisher wasn't actually abused. One of which,
• 1:12:45
  Speaker 1: by the way, is absolutely zero emotion whatsoever. And by
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 1: the way, for the record, the same thing happened with
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 1: Matt Sandusky and the ridiculous Happy Valley documentary that was
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 1: starring Matt Sandusky. There were things that Matt Sandusky said
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 1: in a very softball interview that completely obliterated his story,
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 1: if you actually know what he was alleging, and you
• 1:13:08
  Speaker 1: know the reality of the circumstances. So sometimes softball interviews
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 1: are actually more dangerous and can be more enlightening regarding
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 1: allegations that are not necessarily true. Now, when it came
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: to Aaron Burnett and Burnett Green Palencia, there weren't any
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: as dramatic as Aaron Fisher and Matt Sandusky red flags,
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 1: but there were a couple of things. Like, for instance,
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 1: with regard to why she didn't report this sooner. Her
• 1:13:44
  Speaker 1: explanation is that she was embarrassed. Embarrassed. Embarrassed. Not afraid.
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 1: She was embarrassed. Not traumatized. She was embarrassed. Now, look,
• 1:14:07
  Speaker 1: I'm not a woman. I've never been a victim of
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 1: sexual assault. I can't say for sure exactly what would
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 1: be going through a woman's mind, especially if she experienced
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 1: something this horrific. But it's hard for me to understand, okay,
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 1: for some reason you don't go to police for over
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 1: two weeks, and the reason is you're embarrassed. You're embarrassed.
• 1:14:32
  Speaker 1: You're embarrassed. And her explanation for why she changed her
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 1: mind was that she was doing a campaign event for
• 1:14:39
  Speaker 1: seniors and she suddenly realized that how can she fight
• 1:14:44
  Speaker 1: for them if she's not willing to fight for herself
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 1: or something along those lines. I'm like, what? So it
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 1: only just occurred to you while doing a campaign event,
• 1:14:56
  Speaker 1: which by the way almost sounds like a campaign commercial,
• 1:14:59
  Speaker 1: it only just occurred to you that It would be
• 1:15:05
  Speaker 1: hypocritical for you to run for Congress and not try
• 1:15:08
  Speaker 1: to get two thugs off the street who brutally raped you? Really? Really.
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 1: I'm having a hard time, a really hard time, reconciling
• 1:15:21
  Speaker 1: that in my brain. Now, why does the word embarrassing
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 1: raise a red flag? One, because to me it's not
• 1:15:30
  Speaker 1: the right word. It doesn't make any sense. But more importantly,
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 1: it raises the possibility, I want to underline possibility, going
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 1: back to what the husband said about the two-day disappearance,
• 1:15:47
  Speaker 1: that what actually happened here was embarrassing to her and
• 1:15:55
  Speaker 1: that she didn't want to tell anybody about it. See,
• 1:16:00
  Speaker 1: in her brain, she's saying, This was embarrassing, not traumatic,
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 1: not scary, embarrassing. Again, this doesn't prove an alternative scenario
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 1: is the one that's actually the truth, but it at
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 1: least raises the specter. If you're using your brain, you go,
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 1: this scenario doesn't really make a lot of sense. Is
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 1: there an alternative scenario that might make sense? And when
• 1:16:31
  Speaker 1: she uses the phrase embarrassing, embarrassing, and you connect it
• 1:16:35
  Speaker 1: to the husband being confused and hurt, I believe that's
• 1:16:41
  Speaker 1: how he phrased it, by her two-day disappearance and feeling
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 1: like she might be hiding something from him, now all
• 1:16:48
  Speaker 1: of a sudden you're starting to go, oh, okay, that's interesting. Again,
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 1: not proof, but we have her using the word embarrassing,
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 1: and we have this two-day disappearance that for some reason,
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 1: isn't being explained. And we have the statements of the
• 1:17:06
  Speaker 1: husband that are interesting, to say the least. And then
• 1:17:10
  Speaker 1: we have something else that happened in the interview with
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 1: Erin Burnett. Because the congressional candidate, Bernadette Green-Palencia, says that
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 1: her world exploded. Her world exploded. To me, this is
• 1:17:33
  Speaker 1: really very significant. She uses the phrase, my world exploded.
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 1: And on what date is she referring when she says
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: her world exploded? Not August 14th, the day that she
• 1:17:52
  Speaker 1: says she was brutally raped in public by two men,
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 1: which the way she describes it, beyond horrific. That would
• 1:18:02
  Speaker 1: explode anybody's world. No, she's not referring to that. She's
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 1: referring to when the story became public. Her world exploded
• 1:18:17
  Speaker 1: when the story became public. Really? Hmm. Really? How does
• 1:18:28
  Speaker 1: that make any sense? Again, None of this proves that
• 1:18:32
  Speaker 1: what she's saying is untrue. None of this proves an
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 1: alternative scenario. But it raises, in a rational world, which
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 1: we don't live in anymore, especially when it comes to
• 1:18:43
  Speaker 1: the legacy media, it raises questions, or at least should
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 1: raise questions, and it raises the possibility that there is
• 1:18:52
  Speaker 1: an alternative scenario here that has nothing to do with
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 1: her actually being brutally raped by two men outside in
• 1:19:01
  Speaker 1: a busy area. with no suspects now. We're two months later. Today,
• 1:19:06
  Speaker 1: as I'm taping this, is two months after this event
• 1:19:09
  Speaker 1: allegedly occurred. And the authorities have gone silent. The media
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 1: has gone silent. I mean, where's the outrage over this?
• 1:19:16
  Speaker 1: Where's the thirst to find these guys for justice and
• 1:19:20
  Speaker 1: to get them off the streets? The authorities haven't made
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 1: any statement in many days. They haven't made any declarative
• 1:19:29
  Speaker 1: statements really about this hardly at all, basically just perfunctory statements.
• 1:19:34
  Speaker 1: There's no sign of any suspects, despite the fact that
• 1:19:38
  Speaker 1: there's security cameras everywhere in largely populated areas in this
• 1:19:43
  Speaker 1: day and age. So the absence of evidence here is
• 1:19:49
  Speaker 1: getting darn close to evidence of absence. And very early
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 1: on in this story, I put out a poll on X,
• 1:19:59
  Speaker 1: which mostly just goes to my followers, but it had
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 1: well over 500 responses. And I gave those that responded
• 1:20:07
  Speaker 1: to the poll four different options about what they believed
• 1:20:10
  Speaker 1: about this story. I basically said, what are the chances
• 1:20:15
  Speaker 1: of her story being totally true? And the four options
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 1: were 0%, 40%, 60%, and 100%, because they only give
• 1:20:20
  Speaker 1: you four options in these X polls. And 86% of
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 1: those that responded to this poll said the chances of
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 1: her story being totally true were 0%.
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 2: 0%.
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 1: 86% of over 500 respondents said 0% chance that her
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 1: story is true. Now, Weirdly, because this is the way
• 1:20:56
  Speaker 1: my brain works on this, I get that from a
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 1: cerebral perspective, common sense standpoint, this story can't be true. However,
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 1: the story is so weird, so obviously not true, that
• 1:21:17
  Speaker 1: I actually have to at least be open to the
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: possibility that there is some truth to it. And I
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 1: mean that sincerely. I'm not just covering my ass because
• 1:21:26
  Speaker 1: I don't give a shit about covering my ass at
• 1:21:28
  Speaker 1: this point in my life and career. I'm just giving
• 1:21:31
  Speaker 1: it to you straight. There are some stories that are
• 1:21:35
  Speaker 1: so bizarre that it's possible they're true. I'm not saying
• 1:21:40
  Speaker 1: it's true. I'm definitely betting that it's false. But I
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 1: think you have to at least consider that this story
• 1:21:50
  Speaker 1: might be true because it's so obviously false. And yes,
• 1:21:56
  Speaker 1: the media refused to accept that a person who's a
• 1:21:59
  Speaker 1: congressional candidate who's in a long shot bid in a
• 1:22:04
  Speaker 1: red district who's a Democrat has a huge incentive for
• 1:22:08
  Speaker 1: a story like this to be told, right? I mean,
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: this is the ultimate Hail Mary. There's all sorts of
• 1:22:13
  Speaker 1: possible motivations for making this up, whether she's trying to
• 1:22:17
  Speaker 1: cover for something embarrassing that happened in her life or
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: some decision that she made that she was embarrassed about
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 1: that caused her to go missing for two days. That's
• 1:22:27
  Speaker 1: a possible motivation, but there's also the inherent motivation of
• 1:22:30
  Speaker 1: that she's running for office, which is a lot like
• 1:22:33
  Speaker 1: filing a lawsuit, like in the Cornell case. The media
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 1: just refuses to accept that, wait a minute, She actually
• 1:22:41
  Speaker 1: has a motivation to not tell the truth here. She
• 1:22:43
  Speaker 1: has something to gain here. Not even considered. Erin Burnett
• 1:22:47
  Speaker 1: didn't even consider that as part of the equation. But
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 1: I would not put the chances at 0%. I don't
• 1:22:55
  Speaker 1: know what I would put them at, maybe 5% or 10%.
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 1: But I don't think it's 0% because if I was
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 1: going to make up a story like this, if I'm her,
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 1: I would have done a better job. I feel like
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 1: the story is so bad that it could possibly be true. Now,
• 1:23:15
  Speaker 1: I do want to also mention that much like Aaron
• 1:23:18
  Speaker 1: Fisher and Matt Sandusky, just from the broadest portion of
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 1: the story, maybe the most important thing and why I
• 1:23:28
  Speaker 1: don't want this to get lost is her utter lack
• 1:23:31
  Speaker 1: of emotion in talking about. I've seen a couple of
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 1: different interviews with her. By the way, I have to say,
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 1: the local television story in Arizona that I saw surrounding
• 1:23:42
  Speaker 1: an interview that she did with them was way, way
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 1: more journalistically solid than what CNN did. At least the
• 1:23:52
  Speaker 1: local story referenced, they didn't ask her about, but at
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 1: least referenced all of the weirdness of her story and
• 1:23:58
  Speaker 1: all the things that don't really make a lot of sense.
• 1:24:01
  Speaker 1: So I found that to be interesting. But in neither
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 1: of these two interviews, was there even an ounce of emotion?
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is a woman who was brutally, horribly
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 1: raped in what had to be an unbelievably traumatic experience.
• 1:24:22
  Speaker 1: Literally zero emotion. Zero. Now, look, everyone's different, but I'm sorry,
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 1: that doesn't make a lot of sense to Zero emotion.
• 1:24:37
  Speaker 1: Zero emotion. And these other statements that if you think
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 1: about this critically are at least somewhat, if not very
• 1:24:45
  Speaker 1: consistent with all sorts of plausible alternative scenarios. And so
• 1:24:54
  Speaker 1: I have a feeling that this case is going to
• 1:24:55
  Speaker 1: be one of those better left unsolved, really, to quote
• 1:25:00
  Speaker 1: Spinal Tap, one of my favorite movie quotes of all time,
• 1:25:04
  Speaker 1: where they're talking about one of the dead drummers and
• 1:25:07
  Speaker 1: how he died and the authorities decided this was one
• 1:25:09
  Speaker 1: of those crimes better left unsolved. I feel like that's
• 1:25:13
  Speaker 1: where we're heading on this story. That's my gut instinct.
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 1: I feel like this one's just going to disappear. And that,
• 1:25:20
  Speaker 1: of course, when she loses the election, it's no longer relevant.
• 1:25:24
  Speaker 1: That's my guess. Because I don't think that there's going
• 1:25:28
  Speaker 1: to be an incentive for anyone to debunk it. because
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 1: it's very dangerous. See, that's part of what we've created here.
• 1:25:37
  Speaker 1: We've created a situation where for anyone, especially in a
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 1: major media outlet, to proactively try to debunk this story
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 1: is just not worth the risk. The reward would not
• 1:25:51
  Speaker 1: be worth the risk, because if you try to debunk
• 1:25:54
  Speaker 1: this and it goes poorly, or if it turns out
• 1:25:57
  Speaker 1: you're wrong... By the way, it might not even matter
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 1: if you're wrong. You could be right, and it could
• 1:26:01
  Speaker 1: still blow up in your face. So no one's going
• 1:26:05
  Speaker 1: to do it because the charge is just that dangerous.
• 1:26:10
  Speaker 1: It's that outrageous. How could you possibly question this poor
• 1:26:14
  Speaker 1: woman who was brutally raped? Well, that's a problem. If
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 1: we care about the truth, people ought to be forced
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 1: to answer questions, especially when They don't come forward to
• 1:26:26
  Speaker 1: the authorities for over two weeks, and they do so
• 1:26:29
  Speaker 1: in a way that has very little evidentiary value. I'm sorry.
• 1:26:35
  Speaker 1: That's part of the deal here. And unfortunately, we've long
• 1:26:39
  Speaker 1: ago lost that because the pendulum has swung so far
• 1:26:43
  Speaker 1: in what was probably the wrong direction when it comes
• 1:26:46
  Speaker 1: to sex abuse allegations, where it was very difficult for
• 1:26:49
  Speaker 1: women to be believed. And now... it's gone so far
• 1:26:53
  Speaker 1: in the other direction. You're not even allowed to question them.
• 1:26:57
  Speaker 1: Even when they have an obvious motivation to tell a story,
• 1:27:00
  Speaker 1: that's not necessarily true. And their story makes absolutely no sense.
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 1: So I will keep an eye on this one, but
• 1:27:07
  Speaker 1: my guess is that this is going to be, this
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 1: is going to go down the memory hole pretty darn fast.
• 1:27:14
  Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to today's free drop of the abbreviated show.
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 1: If you're interested in listening to the entire show, You
• 1:27:21
  Speaker 1: must become a patron. Please go to Patreon. That's P-A-T-R-E-O-N
• 1:27:27
  Speaker 1: dot com. Patreon dot com slash The Death of Journalism
• 1:27:34
  Speaker 1: with John Ziegler. My name is J-O-H-N-Z-I-E-G-L-E-R. That's Patreon dot
• 1:27:42
  Speaker 1: com slash The Death of Journalism with John Ziegler. Good
• 1:27:47
  Speaker 1: luck to you on that. But that's how you can subscribe.