All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 3, 2018 - The Ben Shapiro Show
57:41
Did The Kavanaugh Allegations Just Implode? | Ep. 630
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
We take a look at all of the breaking news on the Kavanaugh allegations, and there is a lot of it.
The media humiliate themselves, as per our usual routine every single day here.
And we take a look at the funniest story of the year.
It is astonishingly good.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
I stepped away for the final Jewish holidays, guys.
That was the last ones of the year.
Okay, so now we're safe.
We're good now.
Okay, the last couple days, first of all, I will say, this was the best part of the Jewish holidays.
It was Simchat Torah.
I know you want to get to the news, but I'm just going to ramble on for a while about Judaism.
But in any case, it was partying with the Torah.
It was really great.
My kids really enjoyed it.
And now I am refreshed and I come back and the news cycle is just rich and replete With joy!
And I'll bring you all of that.
First, I want to mention, we really appreciate you tuning in and sharing the podcast with all of your friends.
If you enjoy what we do, please subscribe to The Ben Shapiro Show on iTunes.
And while you're there, leave us a five-star rating.
No, but first, if you like the show, just do it.
It takes a second.
It really helps us out.
Those ratings on iTunes help actually elevate the ratings on iTunes overall.
So make sure that you leave a five-star view for us.
If you don't like the show and you want to leave us a one-star rating, well, then don't bother doing it.
You know, you got better things to do today.
Just leave us five stars because, let's face it, that's all we really deserve.
And now, but first, let's talk about your tooth health.
So, the reality is that you are lying to your dentist on a routine basis, right?
You go in there, your dentist says, how often do you brush?
You're like, eight times a day.
Every time I breathe, I brush my teeth.
Like, well, how often do you floss?
You're like, I haven't stopped flossing.
You see this in my mouth right here?
Piece of floss.
Well, you're lying to your dentist, and we all know you're lying to your dentist, and that's why you ought to be using Quip instead.
Quip is the best electric toothbrush on the market.
It's a fraction of the cost of bulkier brushes while still packing just the right amounts of vibration to help clean your teeth.
Quip's built-in timer helps you clean for the dentist-recommended two minutes with guiding pulses that remind you when to switch sides.
Next, Quip's subscription plans are for your health, not just convenience.
They deliver new brush heads on a dentist-recommended schedule every three months for just five bucks, including free shipping worldwide.
Finally, everyone loves Quip.
They were on Oprah's O'List, they were named one of Time's Best Inventions, and they are the first subscription electric toothbrush accepted by the American Dental Association.
That is for a reason.
It is awesome stuff.
Quip starts at just $25.
If you go to getquip.com slash Shapiro right now, you get your first refill pack free with a Quip electric toothbrush.
Again, first refill pack free at getquip.com slash Shapiro.
That's getquip.com slash Shapiro.
So with the news cycle like this, I will say it is very difficult.
To take off a couple of days and then jump right back into the news cycle.
I jumped back into the news cycle yesterday, last night, to find that we are apparently just a couple of days away from the actual vote on Brett Kavanaugh.
That's what Mitch McConnell said this morning.
The Senate Majority Leader says we will be voting on Kavanaugh in the full Senate by the end of the week.
The FBI report is expected to wrap today or tomorrow at the very latest.
And the FBI is basically saying, we've got nothing, right?
We've come up with nothing.
Shocker.
They've come up with nothing new.
Now, that doesn't mean the Democrats are going to accept the FBI report.
Of course not.
An allegation about a Republican is tantamount to the allegation being true, according to folks on the left, which we'll get to in just a second.
According to the Wall Street Journal, though, people familiar with the process said on Tuesday that the FBI investigation into the allegations of sexual misconduct against Judge Kavanaugh could wrap up very soon, well ahead of the end-of-week deadline, which we hope for and pray for so that we don't have to spend this weekend covering breaking news again.
GOP aides on the Hill Another person familiar with the process said they were expecting the Bureau to conclude its report as late as late Tuesday or early Wednesday.
Agents had interviewed at least four people as of Tuesday in the background investigation of Judge Kavanaugh.
The White House had given the Bureau until Friday to wrap up the probe.
Senators will be shown the FBI's findings.
It's not clear what exactly will be made public at any point.
Suffice it to say, it's not expected that anything groundbreaking will happen here.
And there's a reason that Mitch McConnell is going off on the Democrats over all of this.
The Senate Majority Leader, he comes forward, he says, listen, all of this was a stall tactic.
All of this was a delay tactic.
Democrats who had no intention of voting for Brett Kavanaugh in the first place are suddenly acting all outraged that the FBI investigation is wrapping too soon.
When they knew it would wrap that soon, because the FBI investigation Actually has less investigative power than the Senate Judiciary Committee.
They can't subpoena documents.
They can't subpoena witnesses.
It's not a criminal investigation.
So that means they can go and ask people to talk to them and they talk to the people they can talk to.
But Democrats are whining anyway.
Here's Mitch McConnell saying, listen, we're not going to hold this sucker up any longer.
We're done here.
These statements remind us Democrats may be trying to move the goalposts every five minutes, but their goal has not moved an inch.
They will not be satisfied.
Unless they have brought down Judge Kavanaugh's nomination.
And you can tell, Mitch McConnell, I mean, that is cocaine Mitch amped up right there.
I mean, cocaine, really, I mean, that's seriously what Mitch McConnell looks like when he is angry and amped up.
Not a joke.
And there's a reason Republicans are unified on this one, and it's because this feels like a witch hunt.
This feels as though the Democrats are fully intent on destroying a good man simply for the sake of delaying a Supreme Court nomination.
And the Democrats, I will say, there are certain times in American politics that are very difficult to watch.
This is one of those times because things are so ugly and so acrimonious and so nasty right now that you find yourself fulminating about it even when you don't want to think about politics.
The idea that somebody can be railroaded on one allegation with no corroborative evidence, and as we will see, a lot of evidence that cuts the other way, and that this is supposed to finish people's lives?
If you're a good person, you should be thinking twice about whether this is the society that you actually want to live in.
Do you want the possibility that someone can come forward with an allegation against you at any time and destroy you?
Good people will not go into American public life.
They won't.
Really, they won't.
A lot of folks ask me if I ever want to run for office.
I will tell you this.
Ten years ago, I was much more interested in running for office than I am now.
And one of the reasons is because the way people are treated when they run for office, or are on the judiciary, or are in good stead making policy, that is not something you want to put your family through.
Even if you're as clean as the driven snow, it's not something you want to put your family through.
It's also, by the same token, while it's difficult to watch all of this, it's also clarifying.
And the idea that the veil is being stripped back and you're seeing people for who they are.
One of the people who we saw who he was over the last several days, and I had to comment on this because I missed the opportunity to on Monday, was James Comey.
So James Comey, who is touted as the most honest man in American politics, he lived for a higher loyalty, right?
He's a higher loyalty, James Comey, the FBI director that President Trump fired.
And President Trump called him a grandstander at the time.
And I said President Trump was right to call him a grandstander and should have fired him immediately upon taking office.
Well, James Comey in the New York Times had a piece earlier this week, and I want to read you some of the piece because it sets the baseline for where Democrats and where folks on the left were going with Kavanaugh.
And now it turns out that none of this is going to come true.
So James Comey had a piece earlier this week, and it was called The FBI Can Do This.
And so the FBI is back in the middle of it.
When we were handed the Hillary Clinton email investigation in 2015, the bureau's deputy director said to me, you know you are totally screwed, right?
He meant that, in a viciously polarized political environment, one side was sure to be furious with the outcome.
Sure enough, I saw a tweet declaring me a political hack, although the author added tongue-in-cheek, I just can't figure out which side.
And those were the good old days.
President Trump's decision to order a one-week investigation into sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh, his Supreme Court nominee, comes in a time of almost indescribable pain and anger, lies, and attacks.
And he goes on, talks about how terrible the president of the United States is, and then finally he gets to Brett Kavanaugh.
And he suggests that the time-bound nature of the FBI investigation is really bad.
Because, of course, Democrats, folks on the left, they don't want Kavanaugh nominated.
The whole goal of this investigation, the whole goal of Democratic tactics here is to stall beyond the election.
That's all they want.
Now, it turns out this is backfiring radically.
I will get to the polls in just a minute.
Republicans have not been as unified and motivated since the 2016 election and probably since 2010.
It's been a long time since I've seen Republicans this motivated, this unified, and this ready to go to the polls.
It's pretty astonishing.
But here's what James Comey says.
He says, Sexual assaults that the president says never happen, that some senators have decried as a sham cooked up to derail a Supreme Court nominee, and that other senators believe, beyond all doubt, were committed by the nominee.
If truth were the only goal, there would be no clock, and the investigation wouldn't have been sought after the Senate Judiciary Committee already endorsed the nominee.
Instead, it seems the Republican goal is to be able to say there was an investigation and it didn't change their view, while the Democrats hope for incriminating evidence to derail the nominee.
Well, no, the Republicans didn't ask for an FBI investigation because there had already been six FBI background checks of Brett Kavanaugh.
None of them had raised anything.
And the Senate Judiciary Committee, as mentioned, has more investigative power than the FBI.
They went ahead with this because Jeff Flake felt that maybe this would make some of the senators sitting on the fence a little bit more comfortable.
But James Comey continues.
He says although the process is deeply flawed and apparently designed to thwart the fact-gathering process, the FBI is up for this.
It's not as hard as Republicans hope it will be.
FBI agents are experts at interviewing people and quickly dispatching leads to their colleagues around the world to follow with additional interviews.
Unless limited in some way by the Trump administration, they can speak to scores of people in a few days if necessary.
They will confront people with testimony and other accounts, testing them, pushing them in a professional way.
Agents have much better nonsense detectors than partisans because they aren't starting with a conclusion.
This is the best part.
Yes, the alleged incident occurred 36 years ago, but FBI agents know time has very little to do with memory.
This is the former FBI director saying that time has very little to do with memory.
That is an insane statement.
That is insane.
Scientific evidence proves that memory has nearly everything to do with time.
That the further something is in the past, the worse you remember it.
You may think you remember something clearly.
The truth is you probably don't.
I love this from James Comey.
He says, So James Comey already condemning Kavanaugh as a liar, even though Kavanaugh actually hadn't lied about anything, and there's no proof Kavanaugh lied about anything.
We'll get to that in just a second.
But I love this comment.
So James Comey already condemning Kavanaugh as a liar, even though Kavanaugh actually hadn't lied about anything, and there's no proof Kavanaugh lied about anything.
We'll get to that in just a second.
But I love this comment.
He says that FBI agents know that time has little to do with memory and that significance drives memory because everybody remembers what the weather was like on their wedding day.
First of all, the reason you remember anything on your wedding day is because there was a photographer there taking pictures of the whole thing.
And then you go back and you look at the pictures of your wedding day and that is what you call an aid to memory.
Second of all, if his argument is that everyone knows what the weather was like on their wedding day, Then why doesn't Christine Blasey Ford remember where it happened?
When it happened?
What the weather was like on that day?
Who drove her there?
Who drove her home?
Who else was at the party?
She doesn't remember anything!
So if significance drives memory, then why exactly doesn't she remember anything about what happened except supposedly that Brett Kavanaugh was there?
So all of this is completely self-defeating.
It's just, but James Comey, you know, acting as the supposed good guy in the room, the objective observer in the room, is already inciting Brett Kavanaugh without even recognizing that his own words basically undercut the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford.
This is where we are.
People who are purporting to be objective are just falsifying.
People who are purporting to be objective on this, instead of saying we don't have enough information yet, already at the beginning of the week, they were saying that Kavanaugh is guilty.
And that was the expectation.
That Kavanaugh was going to be guilty.
And that no matter what happened, we could be assured that something would arise that would stop Brett Kavanaugh's nomination.
Instead, as it turns out, there's some evidence that is now arising suggesting that Christine Blasey Ford has lied and lied repeatedly.
Now, these are uncorroborated allegations of lies from Christine Blasey Ford, but no more uncorroborated than Ford's testimony itself.
So the same people who are saying that the testimony that's now been given, put forth about Christine Blasey Ford, The same people saying that that's uncorroborated stuff are perfectly fine with her uncorroborated testimony destroying Brett Kavanaugh.
So either you want evidence corroborated or you don't want evidence corroborated.
You don't get to pick and choose.
You don't get to say that Brett Kavanaugh should be taken down on the basis of uncorroborated allegations.
But Christine Blasey's floor testimony should be respected.
Until it is disproved by corroborated allegations.
Either corroborative evidence is necessary or corroborative evidence is not necessary.
We'll get to the holes in Christine Blasey Ford's story in just one second.
But first, let's talk about how you can save money.
So these days, as you may have noticed, it's pretty tough to get people to agree on anything.
But there's one thing we can all get behind, and that is saving the dough.
Honey is a free shopping tool that automatically searches the internet for the best promo codes every single time you buy something online.
Honey believes everyone deserves the best prices possible on all of the things they like, which is why Honey works on all your favorite sites.
Amazon, eBay, J.Crew, Walmart, Best Buy Group, on all of them.
In fact, Honey has already saved listeners of this podcast an average of $26.34.
That's how many listeners of this podcast have used Honey and how much money they're saving you.
You know, over on Amazon, I shop on Amazon all the time.
The other day, I bought a series of books from Amazon, and because of Honey, I was able to get a discount on the books.
Amazon is just that good, and so is Honey, right?
If it weren't for Honey, I would be getting a more expensive deal.
I buy stuff from Amazon all the time.
Honey helps me nearly every time I shop.
Honey has 10 million members, over 100,000 five-star reviews.
Honey is the money-saving shopping tool everybody can agree on.
Get Honey for free at joinhoney.com slash Ben.
That's joinhoney.com slash Ben.
Honey is the easiest way to save money while shopping online.
Again, go to joinhoney.com slash ben to check it out.
Okay, so here is the bad news for Christine Blasey Ford.
There's a letter that is now out from Christine Blasey Ford's ex-boyfriend.
And this letter is not good for Christine Blasey Ford.
It is a statement given under penalty of perjury.
So if the person's lying, then they could be brought up on charges.
And here's what it says.
This was turned over to Fox News.
I blank am a current resident of California.
I first met Christine Blasey, now Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, in 1989 or 1990 in California.
From 1990 to 1991, I was just friends with Ford.
From approximately 1992 to 1998, I was in a relationship with Dr. Ford.
I found her truthful and maintained no animus towards her.
During our time dating, Dr. Ford never brought up anything regarding her experience as a victim of sexual assault, harassment, or misconduct.
Dr. Ford never mentioned Brett Kavanaugh.
During some of the time we were dating, Dr. Ford lived with Monica L. McLean, who I understood to be her lifelong best friend.
During that time, it was my understanding that McLean was interviewing for jobs with the FBI and U.S.
Attorney's Office.
I witnessed Dr. Ford help McLean prepare for a potential polygraph exam.
Dr. Ford explained in detail what to expect, how polygraphs worked, and helped McLean become familiar and less nervous about the exam.
Dr. Ford was able to help because of her background in psychology.
Dr. Ford and I lived together while we were dating and stayed together in a long-distance relationship when Dr. Ford moved to Hawaii sometime around 1998, although I'm not sure of the particular year and it might have been a bit earlier or later.
While visiting Ford in Hawaii, we traveled around the Hawaiian Islands, including one time on a propeller plane.
Dr. Ford never indicated a fear of flying.
To the best of my recollection, Dr. Ford never expressed a fear of closed quarters, tight spaces, or places with only one exit.
I assisted Dr. Ford with finding a place to live in California.
She ended up living in a very small 500 square foot house with one door.
Despite trying to maintain a long-distance relationship, I ended the relationship once I discovered Dr. Ford was unfaithful while living in Hawaii.
After the breakup, I took her off the credit card we shared, but nearly one year later, I noticed Dr. Ford had been charging the card and charged about $600 worth of merchandise.
When confronted, Dr. Ford said she did not use the card, but later admitted to the use after I threatened to involve fraud prevention.
I didn't speak to Ford again until about 2002, when Ford contacted me briefly.
After that, I hadn't thought much about her until I saw her story in the Washington Post on Sunday, September 16, 2018.
I do not want to become involved in this process or current investigation, but wanted to be truthful about what I know.
So pretty damning stuff from her ex-boyfriend about Christine Blasey Ford, really undercutting her veracity.
In just a second, I'll explain why.
So this letter suggests a couple of reasons why Dr. Ford's veracity has been challenged.
One, she never mentioned for years anything about this sexual assault and never mentioned Kavanaugh.
Now, that doesn't necessarily undercut all of her credibility.
According to Ford, she never said anything until 2012.
But it does underscore that for a lady who says that she was very disturbed about everything that happened to her with regard to Kavanaugh, not to mention it for six, seven years, and also to be able to travel in prop planes.
Like, I'm nervous about traveling in prop planes.
Like, propeller planes feel like they're going to go down at any moment.
And she was traveling in prop planes in Hawaii.
She was staying, apparently, according to this guy, in tiny spaces, with no worries about claustrophobia.
She testified in front of the Senate, all of this.
Also, she testified in front of the Senate, she'd never coached anybody with regard to a polygraph.
Remember, she made a big deal out of taking a polygraph.
And she still won't turn over her notes from her psychiatrist.
She turned over her polygraph notes, but her polygraph notes raised some questions of their own, such as, in the polygraph notes, the original polygraph note said, before she took the polygraph, That she was sexually assaulted in the early 80s.
She crossed out early.
Nobody knows why.
Because supposedly the assault happened in 1982.
Then she took the polygraph and then she passed the polygraph.
But she testified under oath that she did not coach anyone on a polygraph.
Now her ex-boyfriend says that's not true.
Here is her testifying about this under oath.
I didn't expect it to be as long as it was going to be, so it was a little bit stressful.
Have you ever given tips or advice to somebody who was looking to take a polygraph test?
Never.
Okay, and it turns out that that is a serious question for her.
Were you lying about that?
So, Senator Chuck Grassley has now sent a letter to the attorneys for this woman, for Christine Blasey Ford, and he asked for material evidence relevant to the allegations.
He says he wants some corroborative evidence.
He says he wants the notes from the therapy sessions that Dr. Ford discussed, and that she turned over to the Washington Post.
Right, he says that he wants copies of all video or audio recordings produced during the course of the polygraph examination of Dr. Ford, which she will not turn over.
And then he says, the full details of Dr. Ford's polygraph are particularly important because the Senate Judiciary Committee has received a sworn statement from a longtime boyfriend of Dr. Ford's stating that he personally witnessed Dr. Ford coaching a friend on polygraph examinations.
When asked under oath in the hearing whether she'd ever given any tips or advice to someone who's planning on taking a polygraph, Dr. Ford replied, never.
This statement raises specific concerns about the reliability of her polygraph examination results.
The Senate therefore needs this information.
Right, so she's got a credibility problem there as well.
Then, she also has another credibility problem.
It turns out that she said in her Senate testimony over and over again that she was in therapy in 2012 because she had a fight with her husband about building a second front door.
And the reason that she wanted a second front door is because she had security concerns because she was still deeply disturbed about her alleged sexual assault at the hands of Brett Kavanaugh.
Well, now it turns out that that's a really dicey story.
Real Clear Investigations, Paul Sperry over at Real Clear Investigations has a piece.
In which she says real estate and other records undercut a key part of Christine Blasey Ford's account of why she finally came forward with charges of attempted rape against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh after some 30 years.
Ford testified last week that she had never revealed the details of the alleged attack until 2012 when she was in couples therapy with her husband.
She said the memories percolated up as they revisited a disagreement they'd had over her insistence on installing a second front door when they remodeled their Palo Alto, California home.
The need to explain a decision her husband didn't understand pushed her to say she wanted the door to alleviate symptoms of claustrophobia and panic attacks based on the alleged assault.
She was specifically asked about this by Dianne Feinstein.
Feinstein asked, is that the reason for the second front door is claustrophobia?
And Ford said, correct.
But documents reveal the door was installed years before as part of an addition and has been used by renters and even a marriage counseling business.
The door was not an escape route, but an entrance route, said an attorney familiar with the ongoing congressional investigation.
It appears the real plan for the second front door was to rent out a separate room.
Palo Alto City records show a building permit for the additional room and exterior door was issued to Ford and her husband on February 4, 2008, more than four years before the May 2012 therapy session where she first identified Kavanaugh as her attacker.
All the remodeling was completed by February 2010.
The only additional permits issued to Ford at her Palo Alto address are for solar panels on the roof, a solar hot water system in the garage, and an electric vehicle charge station for the driveway.
Dr. Randall, who is the marriage therapist, expressed concerns about her real estate transaction and prior relationship with Ford being reported.
She said, I don't want it mentioned.
It's personal.
Since the second front door was installed, students from local colleges have lived in the additional room with the private door.
So, in other words, there are a lot of holes in her story.
We don't know where.
We don't know when.
We don't know that she's actually claustrophobic.
We don't know, we certainly know that she's okay with flying for the most part.
At least she does it a fair bit.
We also know that that second front door story has some holes in it.
All of which suggest that maybe there are some serious questions that need to be asked about Ford's account.
And this week it seems more questions have been raised about that account than have actually been raised about Brett Kavanaugh.
In just a second, I'm going to get to President Trump's response on all of this, which is, you know, peculiarly Trumpian.
But first, let's talk about you saving money on stamps.
So, these days, you could go to the post office.
Post office is a great place, a lot of great services, but you're going to spend time in the car, you're going to spend time in line, or you could sit at your desk and get all the fantastic services of the post office.
You know, right there at your desk.
And that's where stamps.com comes in.
With stamps.com, you can access all the amazing services of the post office right from your desk, 24-7, when it is convenient for you.
Buy and print official U.S.
postage for any letter, any package, using your own computer and printer.
The mail carrier picks it up.
Just click.
Print, mail, you're done.
We use it here at Daily Wire offices all the time.
It saves us a bundle on not only the postage, but also it saves us an enormous amount of money on having to travel back and forth to the post office and spend the money on the gas and lose the time during the day for the folks who work here.
Right now, use promo code SHAPIRO for a special offer from stamps.com.
It includes up to 55 bucks of free postage, a digital scale, and a four-week trial.
Don't wait!
Go to stamps.com.
Before you do anything else, click on the radio microphone at the top of the homepage.
Type in SHAPIRO.
That's stamps.com.
Enter promo code Shapiro.
Go check it out right now.
Stamps.com promo code Shapiro.
Okay, so President Trump has basically had it.
After a couple of weeks of him maintaining silence, or at least being discreet in his opinions about this issue, him saying that he found her testimony compelling, and then he found Kavanaugh's testimony compelling, the president last night decided, you know what?
Done.
Screw this.
No more of this.
So he did a rally.
And at the rally, he decided to launch into Christine Blasey Ford.
Now, there are some folks on the right saying that the president was not mocking Christine Blasey Ford.
He's pretty clearly mocking Christine Blasey Ford.
There's some folks on the left saying he was only mocking Christine Blasey Ford.
No, he was also mocking the fact that her How did you get home?
I don't remember.
How'd you get there?
I don't remember.
Where is the place?
I don't remember.
How many years ago was it?
true at once.
Number one, he can be saying basically true things about the serious holes in Christine Blasey Ford's story.
Two, he probably shouldn't be mocking Christine Blasey Ford.
It's bad politics and it's cruel and there's no reason to do it.
But here is the president going after Christine Blasey Ford in his typically entertaining fashion.
How did you get home?
I don't remember.
How'd you get there?
I don't remember.
Where is the place?
I don't remember.
How many years ago I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
What neighbourhood was it in?
I don't know.
Where's the house?
I don't know.
Upstairs?
Downstairs?
Where was it?
I don't know.
But I had one beer.
That's the only thing I remember.
Okay, so there's the president going off on her.
This, of course, allows the Democrats — the reason it's a bad strategy is it allows the Democrats to misdirect from Kavanaugh to Trump.
Now they can act all outraged, even though there are serious questions about Christine Blasey Ford's story.
And again, no corroboration.
In fact, counter-corroboration.
Every witness she has cited has said they don't remember this party.
Every single witness she has cited said they do not remember this party.
There is no corroborating evidence.
None.
Okay, but because Trump is mouthing off, this allows the Democrats to jump on this, which is what they do.
CNN's Don Lemon says, he can't resist mocking her.
It's just so terrible.
How could he possibly mock her?
Well, I would point out, like, I don't like the mockery either, but I would point out the entire media have been mocking Brett Kavanaugh.
SNL did an entire thing about how Brett Kavanaugh got emotional, and they had Matt Damon.
You remember Matt Damon?
The guy who was ripped apart by the MeToo movement, like, five minutes ago.
Now he's there playing the MeToo movement's go-to guy, mocking Brett Kavanaugh.
So it's fine to mock Brett Kavanaugh, a guy whose life is being torn apart by what appear to be corroboration-free allegations of rape and false allegations of gang rape.
That guy you can mock the crap out of.
But if you mock Christine Blasey Ford, according to CNN, that's the true test of evil.
Now again, I don't think any of these folks should be mocked, but here is Don Lemon going after President Trump, which is why, you know, the president should think twice before doing this sort of stuff in the future.
So we learned tonight that our president cannot resist mocking a woman who he had called a credible witness in front of a cheering crowd.
And we're learning more tonight about Brett Kavanaugh as well.
A letter.
There's a letter.
It was obtained by the New York Times.
It was written in 1983.
We have a copy here.
When he was 18 years old.
Kavanaugh writing to his high school buddies, he says this, and I'm quoting.
We're loud, obnoxious drunks with prolific pukers among us.
Oh my god, he drank in high school!
No!
I've never heard of such a thing!
Except from every high school student who's ever been in high school!
Really, we'll get to the shifting goalposts of the Democrats and the media in just a second, because the goalposts are moving faster than the speed of light.
I didn't think it was possible.
It shouldn't be.
By the laws of physics, it's not possible to move faster than the speed of light, but somehow those goalposts have been shifting faster than the speed of light.
We've actually gone back in time, thanks to the goalpost shifting of the Democrats.
It's truly incredible.
We'll get to all that in just a second.
But Maisie Hirono also attacking President Trump.
How dare President Trump do it?
Remember, Maisie Hirono is one of the people who said all men should sit down and shut up and say nothing about the Brett Kavanaugh allegations.
And so she's a real great source when it comes to, I think, honesty in politics.
But here she is just lamenting the state of our politics after having helped undermine it, after having clocked politics in the back of the head with a shovel and left it bleeding through the nose.
Here she is talking to Anderson Cooper.
We can always count on the president to go down to the lowest common denominator, mock people, call people names, attack them.
This is what he does.
And the thing that Dr. Ford did remember with 100% recollection was that it was Brett Kavanaugh who attacked her.
Okay, so there we have it.
And because she said it, therefore it must be true.
See and believe.
That's all we've got.
It turns out that other allegations with regard to the nominee are also falling apart.
There was an NBC story about Brett Kavanaugh.
This one had to do with Deborah Ramirez.
And it accused Kavanaugh of perjury.
And then it turns out that he was not, in fact, guilty of perjury.
So, here is what NBC originally reported.
They said the text between Bertram and Karen Yarosavage, both friends of Kavanaugh, suggests the nominee was personally talking with former classmates about Deborah Ramirez's story in advance of the New Yorker article that made her allegation public.
Remember, Deborah Ramirez is the lady who alleged that at some frat party at Yale, Brent Kavanaugh exposed himself in front of her.
In one message, Yara Savage said Kavanaugh asked her to go on record in his defense.
Two other messages show communication between Kavanaugh's team and former classmates in advance of the story.
The texts also demonstrate that Kavanaugh and Ramirez were more socially connected than previously understood.
And that Ramirez was uncomfortable around Kavanaugh when they saw each other at a wedding 10 years after they graduated.
Bircham's efforts also show that some potential witnesses have been unable to get important information to the FBI.
On Monday, a senior U.S.
official confirmed the White House has authorized the FBI to expand its initially limited investigation.
Okay, that was the original report.
Then, they went back and stealth edited.
And here's what they added.
In now public transcripts from an interview with the Republican Judiciary Committee staff on September 25th, two days after the Ramirez allegations were reported in The New Yorker, Kavanaugh claimed it was Ramirez who was calling around to classmates trying to see if they remembered it, adding, it strikes me as you know what is going on here.
When someone is calling around to try and refresh other people, is that what's going on?
What's going on with that?
That doesn't sound good.
It doesn't sound good to me.
It doesn't sound fair.
It doesn't sound proper.
It sounds like an orchestrated hit to take me out.
So in other words, NBC first claimed that Kavanaugh was calling around to try and quash Ramirez's story, and now it turns out that he had already testified.
He had already testified that it was Ramirez who was calling around to try and bolster her story.
So good job, media.
Well done all the way through.
There's another allegation that seems to be having some trouble.
Then there's the allegation from Julie Swetnick.
This, of course, coming from Michael Avenatti.
It turns out that a former boyfriend of Julie Swetnick has now issued a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, and here's what it says.
My name is Dennis Ketterer.
I'm a former weeknight meteorologist for Channel 7 in Washington, D.C., and won an Emmy in 1995.
I want to preface this by saying I am neither proud nor guiltless in the actions about to be mentioned in this letter.
I hope my friends, family, and church members can forgive me.
I first met Julie Swetnick in 1993 at a Washington, D.C.
bar near Wisconsin Circle.
I was at a going-away party for Channel 7 anchor Dale Solly.
I left the party to go to the bar to buy a soda.
I haven't drunk alcohol since my 18th birthday.
As I sat alone at the end of the bar, Julie approached me.
She was alone, quite beautiful, well-dressed, and no drink in hand.
Consequently, my initial thought was that she might be a high-end call girl, because at the time I weighed 350 pounds, so what would someone like her want with me?
But there was no conversation about exchanging sex for money, so I decided to talk with her a few minutes.
I had never been hit on in a bar before.
I didn't leave with her that night, although we talked about getting together.
Over the next couple of weeks, we met at what I believed and still believe was Julie's place.
From the beginning, Julie knew I was married and that I was having marital issues.
He says she was an opportunist.
I felt she had only interest in my 350 pound self because I was on TV and well known.
Although we were not emotionally involved, there was physical contact.
We never had sex, despite the fact she was very sexually aggressive with me.
And then he talks about all of her fantasies, you know, sex with multiple guys.
And he suggests that she is politically motivated.
And he says, That basically she's not to be believed.
He basically calls her a sociopath.
And so that's not great for her account either.
And her account always was really troublesome, right?
The gang rape account was always very difficult to substantiate, considering there should have been witnesses for any of that stuff.
We're going to get to a final allegation that the Democrats tried to bring up last minute in just one second.
But first, let's talk about your nutrition.
Right now, take a look at your superfood container.
It has a supplemental fax panel.
That means it is made from extract instead of real food.
Well, the folks over at BrickHouse Nutrition have decided that they needed to create a real superfood that is specially designed to enhance your health and help you reach your full potential, and it's called Field of Greens.
Field of Greens is the first real superfood.
The difference that sets it apart can be seen on the bottle.
It has a nutrition facts panel because it is indeed real food.
One scoop of Field of Greens has a full serving of real certified vegan, vegetarian, and USDA organic fruits and vegetables, complete with antioxidants.
It's a daily clean, green energy that fuels your body for a healthier, happier lifestyle.
Again, text SHAPIRO to 41411.
You can't ask for better than it's the energy choice of the U.S.
Men's Olympic Wrestling Team.
Are you on the Olympic Men's Wrestling Team?
work.
We have folks around the office who have tried it.
They say that it's really good.
If you act now, get a limited time offer by texting Shapiro to 41411.
Again, text Shapiro to 41411.
You can't ask for better than it's the energy choice of the U.S. men's Olympic wrestling team.
Are you on the Olympic men's wrestling team?
I didn't think so.
Go check it out right now.
Brickhouseben.com.
Experience a better you tomorrow.
Go check it out.
Brickhouseben.com and text Shapiro to 41411.
Again, Shapiro to 41411.
Get energy in a much more natural way.
Field of Greens has it for you.
Go check it out right now.
Brickhouseben.com or Shapiro.
Text it to 41411.
Okay, so...
We're going to get to more of these allegations and the best story of the day.
It really is a spectacular story.
We'll get to all of that in just a second.
First, you're going to have to go over to Daily Wire.
This Friday, Daily Wire is launching the next chapter in Andrew Klavan's podcast series, Another Kingdom, performed by Michael Knowles.
If you aren't caught up on the first season, it's available on the website.
Subscribers to Daily Wire get early access to each episode.
And all of it is ad-free.
This season we've added a dramatic visual component, so it really is pretty cool.
If you've never listened to it, it really is great stuff, despite the fact that Michael Mowles does the reading.
He does a good job with it, actually.
He doesn't just sit there and stare blankly into camera, as usual.
It is worth subscribing just for it.
It's really fun and really interesting.
Go check it out right now at dailywire.com.
And subscribe, $9.99 a month to get the rest of this show live as well.
Plus, you get to send us questions in the mailbag, which we'll be doing this week.
Also, when you subscribe at YouTube or iTunes, where you should leave us a review at iTunes, as I mentioned earlier, you'll also get access to our Sunday special.
This week's Sunday special is a guy I've been wanting to have on for a very long time, Jonathan Haidt, professor at NYU, the author of The Righteous Mind and the New York Times bestseller, The Coddling of the American Mind.
He stopped by to talk about free speech, college campus, and all the rest.
Hi, my name is Jonathan Haidt, and I'm going to be talking with Ben on the Ben Shapiro Show Sunday Special.
I'll be talking about my new book, The Coddling of the American Mind, as well as the inexplicable puzzling events that have consumed much of campus life and national politics.
So you're going to want to check that out.
By the way, if you want a preview of what exactly that's going to be like, Thursday night I'm speaking at USC.
There's already talk that things are going to get maybe riotous outside and kind of insane over there.
So always looking forward to that.
Can't just have like a normal speech to a bunch of people.
Gotta always have some chaos.
So we're going to do that on Thursday night.
That will be lots of fun.
Also, I want to thank you.
If you are folks, before you sign off here, I just want to thank you.
If you watched our Sunday special, our Fox News special on Sunday, Really want to thank our ratings were bananas again.
Really great ratings this Sunday, actually increased over our first Sunday show.
And the show this Sunday, this coming Sunday, is going to be awesome as well.
So I encourage you to tune in over there.
We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
So the final allegation that was brought by Democrats, again, all the allegations are falling apart.
The final allegation that was brought against Brett Kavanaugh was brought last minute by Senator Chris Coons.
So, here is the accusation.
Apparently, Chris Coons forwarded an allegation related to Judge Kavanaugh's years in New Haven.
The accuser, who apparently created a TV show in which people strip while dancing to their favorite music.
Which is an awesome TV show, probably.
Of course, Judge Kavanaugh had already graduated when this party allegedly took place and was a first-year law student.
That period is, as you well know, the most academically intense time in most students' lives.
and which allegedly featured some salacious activity.
Of course, Judge Kavanaugh had already graduated when this party allegedly took place and was a first-year law student.
That period is, as you well know, the most academically intense time in most students' lives.
This allegation has all the makings of a tabloid headline.
But there's just one problem.
The accuser freely admits to having no evidence whatsoever that Judge Kavanaugh even attended this party.
This is Chuck Grassley slapping the crap out of Chris Coons.
Rather than provide even circumstantial evidence of Judge Kavanaugh's attendance, the accuser provides some investigative evidence.
He proposes that someone search Judge Kavanaugh's calendars.
The very same calendars your colleagues have dismissed and derided.
to determine whether he attended a frat party at some point in 1987 or 1988.
And that's it.
All he alleges that he once witnessed a salacious party at a house owned by Judge Kavanaugh's undergrad fraternity.
He then separately advises us to obtain and search Judge Kavanaugh's calendars to determine if he attended.
We have reached a new level of absurdity with this allegation.
There is no evidence that Judge Kavanaugh is anywhere near the party or had anything to do with it at all.
In fact, the only person we can be sure attended the party was the accuser.
My investigators have serious work to do.
While the minority has refused to engage with the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh in any meaningful way, my investigators have tried to pursue every relevant lead.
I therefore hope that before forwarding an allegation in the future, you'll first consider whether you'd want you or your staff to spend valuable time investigating it.
Thanks for your consideration.
Honestly, I gotta love Chuck Grassley at this point.
Dude just does not give any Fs at this point.
He's like, you know what?
We are done.
We are just done here.
We are finished.
It's just great.
He did the same thing to Bernie Sanders earlier this week.
Bernie Sanders sent him a letter saying, we want a longer FBI investigation.
And Grassley sent him a letter back saying, Bernie, you came out five minutes after the nomination and said that you were going to oppose Kavanaugh.
Are you going to change your mind?
If you're going to change your mind, maybe we'll talk about it.
It's amazing.
So all of this leads up to the fact that there's just a shifting argument going on on the left.
This started off, if you recall, with an argument that Brett Kavanaugh was unfit for the court because he allegedly tried to rape a girl when he was 17.
Right?
That was the original allegation.
Then it turned into gang rape.
That turned out to be false.
Then it turned into exposing himself at a party.
No evidence of that.
Then it turned into, okay, well, maybe it's because he got angry.
Right?
So he's angry.
We can't have angry people on the court because Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems like a delight.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who goes out and rants as RBG, the notorious RBG, yeah!
And she goes out and she rants politically every five minutes.
She's perfectly, she's perfectly well-balanced to be on the court.
But Brett Kavanaugh, who got mad when you accused him of being a gang rapist, doesn't belong on the court.
The shifting goal posts are just insane.
Here's Hillary Clinton saying, Brett Kavanaugh's behavior is out of bounds.
Well, I mean, Hillary, you want to be president and you drank John McCain under a table and threw a lamp at your husband.
So there's that.
Here's Hillary Clinton wearing, again, something that she got from Mugabe's wardrobe in Zoolander.
But I think for anyone who believes there's such a thing as a judicial temperament, and that we want judges, particularly those on our highest court, to approach issues, approach plaintiffs and defendants with a sense of fairness, that there's a lot to be concerned about.
Yeah, because he got mad when you accused him of being... I remember someone else getting mad when her husband was accused of rape.
I remember that.
Who would that have been?
Accused of sexual assault.
That was probably true.
I remember somebody getting mad about that.
Oh yeah, and she wanted to be president of the United States.
By the way, I should correct my Zoolander reference.
It's Mugatu, not Mugabe.
Mugabe was a dictator of Zimbabwe.
Mugatu is the character from Zoolander.
Okay, how else did this shift the standards?
So Allison Camerata on CNN.
There's a story about how Brett Kavanaugh, back when he was in college, got in a bar fight with a guy.
He threw some ice at a guy.
Now, let me explain how this works.
I went to Harvard Law School.
A lot of great minds there.
A lot of these folks will be senators, the people who are in my class.
And there was a group of guys who would go out.
They invited me, but as you will hear, this is not my type of party.
They would go out to bars, they would get drunk off their butts, and then they would just sock each other in the nuts.
Okay, not a joke.
Like, they would actually just punch each other in the groin.
Like, this is an actual thing that I would hear about later.
As you can imagine, not my kind of party.
Okay, but the accusation here by Allison Camerata is that ice throwers are more likely to assault.
So, if you're in a bar fight with a dude at a bar, and you threw ice at him, then it must be that you sexually assaulted a woman years prior.
Makes perfect sense.
Makes perfect sense.
I'm with you all the way, Allison.
By the way, all the members of Congress who are very upset about drinking, if they say that, you know, heavy drinking is more likely to make you a sexual assaulter, I have some bad news for the folks in Congress.
Okay, the folks in Congress, that place is an unmet AA meeting.
Okay, if anybody ever wanted to win a Pulitzer, all they would have to do is just stake out the bars on Capitol Hill.
The number of Congress people who are fall-down drunks is astonishing.
In any case, here's Allison Camerata making a fool of herself.
I think that if you are known as a belligerent, mean, fighting drunk, that's relevant.
I think that it's relevant to, then, a woman who says that you would corner her and put your hand over her mouth.
Somehow, that, I think, makes more sense than if you were just a fun drunk who always fell right asleep.
Okay, or, alternatively, the two things don't necessarily have to do with one another because guys get in bar fights with other dudes and then they may not touch women.
Because that happens actually a fair bit.
Because that's reality.
That's called men with testosterone being drunk and jackasses.
I swear, it's like these people have never met a man.
It's an incredible, incredible thing.
And then the goalposts shifted even more.
So we'll get to that in just one second.
So the goalposts continue to shift.
Bernie Sanders, who has no intention of voting for Brett Kavanaugh, he says, you know what?
We need more time.
That's what we need.
More time.
Because I am very old, and I cannot comprehend things at the speed at which I once used to comprehend all of the pudding.
And therefore, we need more time.
Sure, I'm not going to vote for him, but that does not matter.
It does not matter at all.
At all, at all.
Bernie, talk.
Go.
What has to happen now is the FBI needs to do a full investigation determining his veracity.
It's not a question of drinking.
Everybody, you know, millions of people in America drink.
It's a question of whether you are lying before the Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate.
If you are lying, you should not be seated.
And by the way, that Investigation should be thorough, should not be limited to a week.
And the idea that we are voting or being asked to vote before this report can be read is totally crazy.
OK, so that's the news story.
They're not taking enough time.
That's that's the real problem here.
If they just took more time and then you have Jeffrey Toobin, who basically sums it up at the very end.
Jeffrey Toobin essentially says, you know what?
You know what?
I don't care whether he's guilty or innocent.
He's white.
Which is rich coming from Jeffrey Toobin, a white dude who knocked up his mistress, tried to pay for her abortion, refused to pay child support until ordered to by a court.
But he says that every allegation should be taken seriously while he sits there on CNN with his job after trying to pay for an abortion and ditch his child support necessities.
Good job, Jeffrey Toobin.
Here he is saying he cries himself to sleep over the fate of white men in America.
The innate sexism of the statement that white men in America don't actually deserve due process.
Now, I'm not a big fan of the victimology.
White men are victims, white men or black people are victims, or gays are victims, or Jews are victims.
I'm not a big fan.
America is a free country.
Nobody's a victim unless you can show me proof of victimhood.
This right here is proof of victimhood.
When the CNN lead legal analyst says that white men do not deserve due process or the presumption of innocence, that actually is pretty good evidence of actual racism and sexism taking place.
Here's Jeffrey Toobin doing it.
I cry myself to sleep over the fate of white men in America.
White men have no power.
White men... I mean, it's such garbage.
I mean, it's so ridiculous.
All this whining about the poor plight of white men is ridiculous.
Okay, it's not... We're not crying about the plight of white men.
There's a white man who's being railroaded based on no presumption of innocence, and you guys are cheering it on!
How are we supposed to react?
I would hope that people of every color would be a little upset when a certain group is singled out and then told that mob rule should prevail.
Mob rule has been historically very bad for minorities in this country.
Very bad for minorities in this country.
That's the reason due process is such an important thing.
It's why it's part of the 14th amendment and not just part of the 5th amendment.
Because the idea was due process had to be extended to all Americans.
It's pretty astonishing.
Now, all of this is, in fact, unifying Republicans.
It should.
I mean, you have Cory Booker, that insane bag of lunacy, who says the senator from New Jersey, Spartacus, he came out and he says that it's actually, he finally spills the beans.
He just says, listen, it doesn't matter whether Kavanaugh is guilty or innocent.
I don't like him because I'm bald or something.
Here is Cory Booker in his crazy eyes.
And then ultimately, not whether he's innocent or guilty, this is not a trial, but ultimately, Has enough questions been raised that we should not move on to another candidate?
And that long list put together by the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society... That's unbelievable!
It doesn't matter if he's guilty or innocent, but have enough questions been raised?
Okay, Mr. Potato Head.
Got up this morning, went and put on his angry eyes.
Cory fricking Booker.
And then they wonder why Republicans are so united.
So here's the here's the hilarious thing.
Democrats thought this was going to unite them.
Oopsie daisy.
It turns out that the Quinnipiac ballot shows that the Democratic generic ballot lead has been sliced in half in a month.
Has been sliced in half.
As I said last week, you know, we did a little kind of Q&A.
I was doing a live radio show and in the middle of the breaks, I was answering questions, which we do for subscribers, which is why you should subscribe.
And somebody asked, you know, do you think Republicans will be more motivated?
I said, I know I am.
If it weren't illegal, I would go register to vote eight times in Ohio.
Because yes, yes, 49% of Americans back the Democratic candidate in their local race for the U.S.
House.
42% support the Democratic candidate.
That is a massive decrease in the Democratic support level.
Okay, when Democrats had a 14-point lead, it's now down to 7 in the Quinnipiac polls.
It is possible that Republicans retain the House because Democrats are so disgusting.
Which would just be poetic justice.
Wouldn't that be phenomenal?
If the Republicans retain the House because of Brett Kavanaugh?
That would just... First of all, the insanity that is likely to break out on the back of that will just be UNBELIEVABLE.
And things will just be nutso.
Nutso bazunkers, as I say to my children.
It'll be crazy.
So we can all look forward to that.
OK, now I have to get to my favorite story of the day.
So this is indeed the best story of the day.
It is a fantastic story.
It's so good.
So it turns out there are these three professors and these three professors, Helen Pluckrose, James Lindsay and Peter Boghossian.
And they decided to prank all of these stupid academic journals out there.
The story is so great.
I love it so much.
Here is Peter Boghossian explaining what exactly they did to prank these journals.
Since approximately June of 2017, I, along with two other concerned academics, Peter Boghossian and Helen Pluckrose, have been writing intentionally broken academic papers and submitting them to highly respected journals in fields that study gender, race, sexuality, and similar topics.
We did this to expose a political corruption that's taken hold of the university.
By this point, several of these papers have been accepted in highly respected journals, and one, that claims that dog-humping incidents can be taken as evidence of rape culture, has been officially honored as excellent scholarship.
I'm not going to lie to you, we had a lot of fun with this project.
The reviewers are worried that we didn't respect the dog's privacy!
That's their concern!
Nobody respected their privacy!
But don't let that lead you to believe that we're not addressing a serious problem.
If you have a few minutes, I'll try to explain.
Okay, it's so good.
It's so good.
So what did they do?
They submitted all these insane papers to these feminist and gender studies journals and they all got printed.
And the papers are unreal.
So there's the dog park paper you heard him describe there about why dog humping incidents are rape culture.
I talked about it on the show.
Here, there's another one where they wrote a paper.
Excuse me, it's so good.
They wrote a paper claiming that when a guy privately pleasures himself while thinking about a woman without her consent, in fact, without her ever finding out about it, that he's committed sexual violence against her.
That was printed in a queer studies journal.
They wrote a paper arguing that the reason super intelligent AI is potentially dangerous is because it is being programmed... I want to give these people a medal.
They argued that the reason super intelligent AI is potentially dangerous is because it is being programmed to be masculinist and imperialist using Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and Lacanian psychoanalysis.
That's their feminist AI paper.
They argued that a fat body is a legitimately built body as a foundation for introducing a category for fat bodybuilding into the sport of professional bodybuilding.
It went into a journal called Fat Studies.
Oh my God.
It's so good.
They found something called feminist glaciology.
Okay, this is a real thing apparently.
So they copied the idea, and then they wrote a feminist astronomy paper arguing that feminist and queer astrology should be considered part of the science of astronomy, which we'll brand as intrinsically sexist.
And researchers loved it.
Then they wrote a paper about trans people in the workplace.
It says men use male preserves to enact dying macho masculinities discourses in a way society at large won't accept.
They published a paper best summarized as, quote, a gender scholar goes to Hooters to try to figure out why it exists.
Okay, it's so, it's so great.
Defamiliarizing common experiences, pretending to be mystified by them, and then looking for social constructions to explain them.
Sure.
Oh man, I can't even read this one on the air.
Wow.
It's, it would be so... I'll try to explain this in the most PG rated possible way.
Wow, this is going to be a challenge.
So they did a paper on certain toys, implements that are used in times of intimacy, typically by men who are not straight.
So they asked the question, why don't straight men tend to pleasure themselves via use of these implements?
That are generally used by gay men, and what would happen if they did?
And their paper was printed in Sexuality and Culture when they concluded that men would be less transphobic and more feminist if they allowed themselves to be treated in a way that straight men typically are not particularly fond of.
You know, that they try to avoid, why we try to avoid going to the proctologist as often as possible.
Oh my god, the very best one, of course.
The very best one is that they submitted a paper to the feminist social work journal, Affilia.
Okay, this is what they did.
A feminist rewrite of a chapter from Mein Kampf.
They literally took a chapter from Mein Kampf, they replaced some of the language with feminist language, and they submitted it to Affilia, and Affilia printed it.
Okay, is it fair to say that all of this stuff is garbage?
That all of these journals are garbage?
I think it's pretty fair to say that.
I think it's pretty fair to say that.
At the time of the publishing, they have seven papers accepted, four of which have been published online.
Three more have been accepted without having had time to see the publication through.
Seven papers are still in play.
Six were retired as fatally flawed.
They had four invitations to peer review other papers as a result of their own exemplary scholarship.
And one paper that gained special recognition for excellence from Gender, Place, and Culture.
That was the dog humping paper.
Just spectacular.
Just spectacular.
I love this.
They said, Part 3.
Why did we do this?
Because we're racist, sexist, bigoted, misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, trans-hysterical, anthropocentric, problematic, privileged, bullying, far-right-wing, cis-hetero, straight-white males, and one female who is demonstrating her internalized misogyny and overwhelming need for male approval.
We wanted to enable bigotry, preserve our privilege, and take the side of hate.
But the real answer is that, obviously, they're joking.
The real answer is that these things are just junk.
Postmodernism is a bag of junk.
It's a bag of junk, and they just proved it.
It's basically a stepped-up version of that story that was floating around for a while from a modern art museum, where a guy went to a modern art museum, took off his glasses, put them on the floor, and then just stood there staring at them.
And soon there were 100 people crowding around to stare at his glasses on the floor.
And he did this for like five minutes.
And then he reaches down, picks up his glasses, wipes them off, puts them on, and leaves.
Right, so it's basically that, except for academic studies journals.
I can't believe that people are upset about the idea of me subsidizing someone to study these topics at college.
We should all be for this.
Okay, so you know what?
That really should have gone in things I like because it is the thing that I like the most of all the things.
It is so good.
Okay, but another thing that I like.
So that's a retroactive thing I like.
Another thing that I like.
Over the weekend I read a really fantastic book.
It's a lot of fun to read called Born to Run by Christopher McDougall.
All about long-distance running.
And the most salient part of this book is that basically he says that athletic sneakers are a scam.
That the people who get the fewest knee and hip injuries running are people who run barefoot or who run with the flattest possible shoes because when you have really nice cushiony shoes, it actually teaches your body not to run properly because you don't actually feel the impact of each step when you're running improperly.
But the book is really, it's a page turner, it's fun to read.
It's basically about super endurance athletes, guys who race 100 miles, which is four marathons in a row at a time.
It's pretty incredible stuff, and women.
And it talks about sort of the history of man Aight.
In terms of anthropology, basically how human beings were evolved, specifically became upright walking creatures so that we could run very long distances.
His theory and the theory of some scientists is the reason we began walking upright, which has always been a great mystery, is because it allows us to shed excess body heat and go very long distances to actually run down animals.
So you could actually catch an antelope simply by running after the antelope, even though you're slower than the antelope, you can run after it, keeping it in sight, until it basically just gives out, falls over, and you eat it.
And that's basically why human beings evolved the way that they did, with no hair and walking upright, and with certain muscles at the back of your neck to keep your head stable.
Really an interesting book, born to run by Christopher McDougall, so that is good stuff.
Okay, time for a couple of quick things that I hate, and then we'll be— I mean, it's a long show, but I'm sorry, I had to take time with that story, it was too good.
Okay, so things I hate, let's do it.
So, Eric Holder.
You remember Barack Obama's wingman?
Remember Barack Obama's wingman?
He said that he was going to turn the AG's office into basically a preserve of the presidency.
Now he says that Jeff Sessions is weakening the Attorney General position.
Even though Jeff Sessions is under fire, even though Jeff Sessions has done, I think, yeoman's work in his job, even though he has been honest about his approach to the job, Eric Holder, the most corrupt AG of my lifetime, he says that Jeff Sessions is a real problem.
I think by taking what he has taken, he not only weakens himself as Attorney General, it has an effect on the institution.
And at some point you have to say to the President, no, you've got to respond to the President.
I mean, these are extraordinary things.
I've never seen a President talk to an Attorney General in the way that this President has spoken to his Attorney General.
But I think you have to respond in extraordinary ways, always thinking about how you're going to protect the institution.
Yes, I'm sure that that's it.
I'm sure that Jeff Sessions is undermining the institution because he hasn't quit.
Because then I'm sure you would love the next AG.
For sure.
For sure.
Amazing stuff from Eric Holder.
Speaking of hypocrisy and stupidity from the Democrats, John Kerry, who just will not leave.
His face, collapsing like a mudslide in the Hollywood hills, growing longer and longer each day.
One day, his face, like an Easter Island head, will stretch all the way from the top of his six-foot-four body, all the way down to the floor, where it will remain for all eternity.
Here is John Kerry, who wants to run for president, the worst secretary of state in American history, Also a terrible senator and a bad human being, talking about why Ted Kennedy was a great human being, even though he left a woman to drown in a river.
What about Ted Kennedy?
Similarly, people have been critical through the years, and he was critical of himself.
He stood up and owned moments where he knew he'd stepped over the lines.
Really?
So that's a thing now?
Ted Kennedy owned up?
He stepped up?
Really?
Like the guy who put on like the fake dog collar?
Like the fake neck collar?
To avoid responsibility?
The guy who claimed that he had taken, the reason that he hadn't, that he'd gone to sleep is because he'd taken a drug that actually is a picker-upper?
Go watch Chappaquiddick if you actually think, the movie Chappaquiddick, if you actually think that what Ted John Kennedy just said is true.
Also, Ted Kennedy, the guy who was so remorseful that he then basically went straight back to sexually assaulting women, along with Chris Dodd.
The two of them would sandwich waitresses at local restaurants.
Really, this was reported by, I think, The New Yorker in 1990, 1989.
So, yeah, well done there, John Kerry.
Just spectacular stuff all the way through.
Okay, before I go, one quick mention of a company that just did me a favor.
So, I know many of you have been wondering, Ben, what's up with that spectacular new yarmulke on your head?
Now, you probably didn't notice because my yarmulke is black, and I mean, most black yarmulkes look the same, but if you were closely watching, and I know my fans were, you'll notice that this yarmulke is missing something.
What is it missing?
It's missing bobby pins.
There are no bobby pins.
But how does it stay on your head, Ben?
That's the question.
Well, the answer is that the bobby pins are internal.
So, for all the Orthodox Jewish listeners that I have, You know, we're a huge crowd.
Massive.
Growing.
Okay?
For all you folks, there's something called Clipped Keepas.
Both words are with a K. And they allow you to... The clips are internal.
So, as you can see, there's no actual bobby pin on top of your head.
It's spectacular.
Zoom in.
Go.
Yep.
Got it.
It's amazing.
Okay, so, go check it out.
ClippedKeepas.com.
They got their free plug.
Good people.
Go check them out right now.
Okay, we will be back here tomorrow with all the latest insanity because my goodness, I leave for two days and it's just madness!
Madness!
We'll see you there then.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Senya Villareal, executive producer Jeremy Boring, senior producer Jonathan Hay.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, and our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Edited by Alex Zingaro.
Audio is mixed by Mike Karamina.
Hair and makeup is by Jesua Alvera.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire Ford Publishing production.
▲
Export Selection