All Episodes
Previous Next
June 24, 2019 - The Michael Knowles Show
48:30
Ep. 370 - Did Trump Rape That Woman?

A New York advice columnist accuses President Trump of raping her 23 years ago in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman. Is her claim credible? We will analyze. Then, new documents show that Ilhan Omar almost certainly committed immigration fraud and possibly did so with her brother. Finally, Pedophilia goes mainstream, and Mayor Pete loses his luster. Date: 06-24-2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
A New York advice columnist accuses President Trump of raping her 23 years ago in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman.
She just seemed to remember this now and is using the accusation to sell a book.
We will analyze whether the claims are credible.
Then, new documents show that Ilhan Omar almost certainly committed immigration fraud and possibly did so with her brother.
Gross.
Finally, pedophilia goes mainstream and Mayor Pete loses his luster in South Bend.
All that and more.
more.
I'm Michael Knowles and this is the Michael Knowles show.
A crazy lady is accusing Trump of raping her 23 years ago.
A crazy lady is accusing Trump of raping her 23 years ago.
There's no other way to describe it.
This isn't to say that there's a 0% chance that the claims are true.
We'll analyze, we'll go through exactly what she said happened and how she's defending it and Trump's response as well.
But it is certainly the case that she is a crazy lady.
It's also a little curious timing.
She's got this book out on feminism and men.
And only now, only as she's going on this book tour, has she remembered this event that occurred allegedly 23 years ago.
She didn't remember it during the last two or three years when President Trump was the most famous person on the face of the planet.
But now she has remembered it.
Now everyone is taking it super duper seriously.
And we will examine what that means for the culture broadly.
I shouldn't say everyone is taking it super seriously.
The mainstream media are taking it seriously.
They're trying to push this story.
But I think people who are on Twitter, people who are just reading this, people who are just voters going about their regular lives, I don't think any of them are taking this seriously.
Because the left has so weaponized sexual assault allegations that at this point, the bar of credulity is very high.
It's very difficult to convince someone this actually happened.
This is bad news for people who actually have survived sexual assaults and rapes, but that's part of the left's plan.
So what are they saying happened?
This woman, E. Jean Carroll, was an advice columnist for Elle, has been an advice columnist for Elle for 26 years.
She now has a book out, What Do We Need Men For?
A Modest Proposal, tells you a little bit about where she's coming from.
And she has this one chapter that she's sent to New York Magazine, which is called Hideous Men.
And the hideous men details all of these men that she hates, the last of whom is Donald Trump.
So one of the previewed sections she sent to New York Magazine, it begins with this line.
When I entered Indiana University, I was the most boy-crazy 17-year-old in the nation.
So she's setting up this idea.
She was boy crazy.
She would go out with all these boys every day.
She was going out with one boy or two boys.
And now, all these years later, she hates men.
She wants to get rid of men.
She no longer sleeps with men.
And she says, in one of these instances, that she was in Bergdorf Goodman, a very expensive store in New York, and...
The scene is a little weird, but she's sort of flirting with Trump and they're joking about lingerie and she brings Trump into a dressing room and she tells Trump to try on lingerie for her or something.
And then he grabs her and he makes a move for her and he's groping her and he's kissing her and then she leaves.
And that's it.
And allegedly, at some point, she's a little unclear on the details, but at some point she says she was almost raped or actually raped, but it didn't last very long.
Okay.
Is her claim credible?
You can read the chapter of her book that she released on New York Magazine.
You can read some of the coverage of it.
You should form your own conclusion on this.
She did an interview on CNN. Listen for yourself.
What do you want to say to Donald Trump?
That terrifies me that you said that.
That is...
At the thought of confronting him?
No.
You know, you just stunned me by saying that.
It terrifies me.
Although, I think I could...
I think...
Yeah.
You think that you could confront him now?
I mean, what part scares me?
Well, will you go with me, Allison?
Seriously.
Listen, that is a terrible situation.
Even a question, it just terrifies me.
Look at me.
I can hardly talk now that you said that.
What part?
What part terrifies you?
Well, it puts...
It reveals to me what I'm in the middle of doing is what it does.
That's...
You've made it very clear what I'm in the midst of doing.
Okay, so this woman is obviously a lunatic, and I don't even mean that to make fun of her or anything like that.
She's clearly not well.
She's either on drugs or she's mentally unstable.
She is not speaking like someone who is in charge of her senses.
She's got these long pauses.
She's saying bizarre lines.
She's not answering questions.
She's not talking about the incident itself.
So she's certainly a lunatic.
Now that doesn't mean that it didn't happen.
That is the other side of it.
So to give her her due doesn't mean it doesn't didn't happen.
We'll go through a couple more moments in this interview and we'll have to come to our conclusion.
But first, let's talk about finding freelance talent for your business or project.
Finding the right freelancer can be time-consuming, frustrating, overwhelming to manage.
Where do you go to find the talent?
Even if you're in a city like LA or New York, everybody's a freelancer.
You could throw a rock and you hit a freelancer, but how do you actually find them?
How do you know that they'll be able to deliver?
Thanks to Fiverr Pro, finding the right freelancer doesn't have to be a struggle.
Fiverr Pro's marketplace connects businesses with hand-vetted freelancers with You can find almost anything on Fiverr.
You can search by service, delivery time, price reviews, and more.
You'll know exactly what you're paying for up front.
There's no negotiating going on.
You just get the price right there.
No transaction is complete until you are 100% satisfied with the work that you receive.
I love Fiverr.
I used Fiverr for years, especially when I was working campaigns in New York.
When I was working campaigns, I was working in the theater.
And sometimes you need some graphic design.
Sometimes you need a little freelance service.
It's so simple.
It saves you time.
Time is money.
And I would use Fiverr again and again.
Fiverr sellers have worked with some of the most influential brands in the world.
You're guaranteed to receive VIP customer support.
Find freelance services you can trust.
Customer service you can count on.
Don't Don't risk the projects you need.
You will get results you can be proud of all on one platform.
Take five and check out Fiverr.com F-I-V-E-R-R two R's dot com and you will receive 10% off your first order by using my code Knowles K-N-O-W-L-E-S Very easy.
Don't waste any more time.
Get the service you need.
I can tell you I have had tremendously good experiences on Fiverr.
Go to Fiverr.com F-I-V-E-R-R dot com code Knowles Fiverr.com, code Knowles.
Check it out.
So this woman is not well, right?
It's really a shame that people are even putting her on television.
It seems exploitative.
Now, did it happen?
That's the question.
There's no evidence that this woman knows Donald Trump or that Donald Trump knows her, except for one photo that she puts in the magazine article.
There's a photo of Donald Trump from behind, but it looks like Trump.
You can tell from the hair.
And they're at some sort of black tie gala and it's in the lobby of a building because you can see the revolving door.
And it looks as though Trump is talking to her husband at the time and her.
Again, who knows?
If you're in public life, you go to events like this all the time.
You meet hundreds of people at these events.
You take hundreds of photos at every one of these events.
You will meet people for 10 seconds.
They'll take a photo 99.9999% of the time.
You will never see that person again.
I was at a conference giving a speech on Friday up in Santa Barbara.
I probably took 100 or 200 pictures there.
I don't know all of those people.
I'll probably never talk to a lot of them again, same as I was at another event last night.
Donald Trump has been doing these for 40 years, so you see one photo.
It doesn't really tell you a whole lot.
So let's let her, in her own words, describe what happened, and then you can decide if this is credible.
And you thought when you included those 11 pages in the book that it wouldn't get this amount of attention?
No.
Why?
He was only one of 21 hideous men.
But it is the President of the United States.
You didn't know the onslaught that you would be in the middle of right now.
I mean, you are talking about the President of the United States, and you are accusing him of sexual assault.
Yeah.
And you've gone there.
It's part of the culture.
It's part of the hideous men thing.
Men have ruled, they have run things, as you know, for the last 20,000 years.
I'm sick of it.
It's just time that women get to run things.
Okay, there's no way she's telling the truth, right?
When you hear this, she's asked, what happened?
Tell me what happened with Donald Trump.
You're accusing Trump of sexual assault.
And she tries to evade it.
First of all, she just kind of nods blankly and won't answer the question, so Alison Camerata has to keep asking.
You accused the president.
And what is her answer?
Does she say, damn right I accused the president.
That man's a horrible rapist and he should be in prison.
No.
She actually kind of defends him.
She goes, oh, he's just one of the men.
There are a lot of hideous men.
So, if this guy raped you, which is the claim, why aren't you going after him?
Why aren't you given all the details you can?
Why aren't you demanding justice?
Why are you defending him?
Well, it's because she's selling a book, which is called Who Needs Men?
Why Do We Need Men?
Something like that.
And She's selling this chapter, Hideous Men, and nobody would read the book, and nobody would read the chapter, and no one would care at all, except that she mentioned Donald Trump.
So she includes Trump in there as almost a footnote, and now everyone's talking about it, but she clearly doesn't want to keep talking about it.
And then you see at the end, she goes, look, it's part of this hideous men thing.
What is the hideous men thing?
That's your term.
I don't know what the hideous men thing is.
This is your ideological construct.
This is like what happens when you see this time and time again.
There's a police shooting.
They say this is evidence of racism.
Then you find out the cop was black.
Then you find out the guy, the perpetrator had a gun.
Then you find out it wasn't an evidence of racial bigotry.
And they say, well, okay, this example wasn't true, but it gets to a greater truth.
That's what we're seeing here, because she's being asked, what happened in this rape?
Did he rape you?
Are you pursuing this?
She goes, well, yeah, but it's not just Trump.
Forget about Trump.
Please stop asking about Trump.
It's part of the broader truth.
It's part of the hideous men thing.
Women have been oppressed for tens of thousands of years.
Men have been running things, and now women need to run things.
Wait, what are we talking about?
They're running things.
Why are we talking about the patriarchy?
We're actually talking about rape.
She doesn't want to talk about that.
She wants to talk about her ideology.
Why?
Because there's no evidence that this actual example actually happened.
But then, even if that isn't enough...
She is asked point blank, will you pursue this as a criminal matter?
Once you're done selling books, once you're done getting New York Magazine to publish your chapter or whatever, will you actually pursue this as a criminal matter?
You know, where there will be an investigation, where there will be evidence, where if you make a false allegation, you look really bad.
It may even be criminal.
Here's what she says.
Are you prepared to keep fighting this, to tell your story?
Yes.
That's what I'm doing.
That's exactly what I'm doing.
It's the only way to change things.
It's the only way.
We have to hold him accountable.
Not only him, but a lot of guys.
And do you think that by pursuing an actual legitimate case through the New York City police, because the mayor has said that because the statute of limitations has changed, do you think that that could help further your story?
I'd consider it, but as far as I know, the limitations have run out.
As far as I know.
But you would consider it now?
I'd consider it.
There it is.
She gives up the whole game.
Allison Camerota, kudos to Allison Camerota for at least asking sort of serious questions.
She says, look, Mayor de Blasio says the law has changed.
You can pursue this case as a criminal matter.
Will you do that?
She says, well, I don't know about that.
I mean, I would consider it, but I don't intend to do it.
And as far as I know, you can't pursue it as a criminal matter.
She's really pushing back on this, saying, no, no, no, I can't have to actually prove what I'm saying.
No, no, I'm pretty sure I don't, because she wrote the book assuming she would never have to prove it.
She published the chapter assuming she would never have to prove it.
Now Alison Camerata is saying, no, no, no, you can't.
Don't worry.
We can pursue this as a criminal matter.
She says, no, well, I would consider it.
And you see there again, she defends Trump.
She says, and it's not just Trump.
It's other guys.
We've got to hold Trump accountable, but it's really bigger.
We have to hold everybody accountable.
If the President of the United States raped you in a dressing room at Bergdorf Goodman, and you somehow just forgot about this for 23 years, and then two and a half years into his presidency, you decide now you're going to start pursuing it, and you are told that he can be held criminally liable, if this accusation is true, then you pursue it as a criminal matter.
If it's not true, you answer like she answered just there.
Never gets into specifics about Trump.
Keeps trying to deflect.
Says she doesn't want to pursue the case.
I'll consider it.
I'll consider it, but I'm pretty sure it's not true.
No, it is.
You can pursue this as a criminal matter, is what Alison Camerot is saying.
She goes, I'm pretty sure you can.
Please don't hold me to this.
Please don't.
Because now the next part of this story, if it is the case that she can pursue this as a criminal matter, will be the obvious question.
Why isn't she going to do it?
There was that woman who, all the statutes of limitations had run out on Bill Cosby.
There was one woman who fell within the statute of limitations.
She pursued legal action and now Bill Cosby's in prison.
So if this were true, if this allegation were true, presumably this woman could do exactly the same thing and then Trump goes to jail.
Except it's not true.
Except there's no evidence that it's true.
What...
Do we conclude from this?
I suspect that this woman is a crazy person.
I think we all can assume she's a crazy person.
I also think she's a bit of a victim here.
I think she's a victim of her publisher, and I think she's a victim of CNN. She writes this book.
She's some longtime feminist, writes a book about how she hates women, or hates men rather, and thinks women should control the whole world.
And her publisher needs to sell books, so probably they're going to try to spice up the book a little bit.
You get this Trump allegation in there.
Then they need to sell the books immediately, so they start pimping her out to New York Magazine.
New York Magazine, which has very little journalistic integrity, decides they're going to run this allegation without any corroboration whatsoever.
Then...
She brings this to CNN. CNN brings her on television.
This is clearly not a well woman, and they are exploiting her.
They're exploiting her to get Donald Trump because the story is too good.
They don't check any of the facts.
They don't have any evidence.
We'll get to President Trump's response, which was typically blunt and direct.
But first, speaking of safety, Ring's mission is to make neighborhoods safer.
Now, you already know about their smart video doorbells and cameras that protect millions of people everywhere.
And you know about them because I tell you about them because they're super cool, they make you feel safe, and they make you feel like you're living in the future.
Ring helps you stay connected to your home anywhere in the world.
So if you are waiting on a package delivery or you are waiting on people who some guests are going to show up or you've got some burglar about to show up or your mother-in-law is about to show up and I don't necessarily know which one is better, you will get an alert and you will be able to see here and speak to them all from your phone.
That is thanks to the HD video and two-way audio features on Ring devices.
So we at The Daily Wire love Ring.
I give it out to all my friends as housewarming gifts.
Senior producer Jonathan Hay, a couple months ago, he's sleeping in his bed at three o'clock in the morning.
What happens?
He gets an alert on his phone.
He could have gotten that alert if he was at the office or if he was on a beach in Hawaii somewhere.
He gets the alert, and it's these two drugged-out wackos trying to case the joint, trying to get into his house.
So he says, hey, what do you want?
He sees them.
He can talk to them.
They say, oh, oh, nothing.
And then they scamper away because they know that that guy's home.
It can just...
Don't be a victim.
Make yourself feel safe.
Make your family feel safe.
As a listener, you will get a special offer on a ring starter kit available right now with a video doorbell and motion-activated floodlight camera.
The starter kit has everything you need to start building a ring of security around your home.
Home security used to be really complicated.
Used to be, there was the neighborhood watch, used to be all these expensive, crazy machines and systems.
This is the first home security system that I have felt is sleek, cool, perfect, simple, an incredible value.
It's just the best one.
It's the first one that I've ever been attracted to, and it really does make me feel safe.
Just go to ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S, ring.com slash Knowles, K-N-O-W-L-E-S. So, how does President Trump respond to these allegations?
Typical Trumpy way, doesn't mess around, doesn't beat around the bush.
He cuts right to the point.
He said, quote, shame on those who make up false stories of assault to get publicity for themselves or sell a book or carry out a political agenda.
Like Julie Swetnick, who falsely accused Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
It's just as bad for people to believe it.
Particularly when there is zero evidence.
Worse still for a dying publication to try to prop itself up by peddling fake news.
It's an epidemic.
False accusations diminish the severity of real assault.
All should condemn false accusations and any actual assault in the strongest possible terms.
And then he said at the end of the statement, If anyone has information that the Democratic Party is working with Ms.
Carroll or New York Magazine, please notify us as soon as possible.
The world should know what's really going on.
It is a disgrace and people should pay dearly for such false accusations.
Everything he said there is absolutely correct.
And as often happens, and I know there's this idea out there that Donald Trump is the least moral man that's ever walked the earth because he's had very public moral failings throughout his career.
This statement shows total moral clarity.
False accusations, especially of crimes as serious as rape, are awful.
They're despicable.
They are, the accusers should be ashamed of themselves.
The journalistic outlets, quote unquote, that peddle them should be ashamed of themselves.
The people who believe them should be ashamed of themselves, who believe them without evidence.
We have to make this perfectly clear.
There is no evidence whatsoever that President Trump did this.
The only reason that we think that this is even possible to have happened at all is because this woman said it happened.
And this is what's behind the left's agenda of believe all women.
Believe all women.
As though having two X chromosomes automatically means you can't lie.
You're biologically incapable of lying if you're a woman.
If you have one of those Y chromosomes, then you gotta have investigations.
Then you need to show evidence.
But women, women can't lie.
Also, men can be women.
Also, gender is a social construct.
Also, there's no such thing as biological sex.
But I'm sorry, those are other leftist premises.
We have to put those aside for now because on this particular tactic, you have to believe all women.
Why?
Women lie all the time.
There have been rape hoaxes all the time.
Some of the biggest rape stories in the country over the last 10 years turned out to be completely fictitious.
That story at UVA that Rolling Stone, super serious journalistic outlet, ran of a girl being gang raped at UVA, completely made up.
She was proven to be a complete liar.
How about Duke Lacrosse?
This was the first major rape case in the last 20 years.
The first major campus rape case that we were talking about forever and ever.
A stripper said that she was raped by the Duke Lacrosse team.
Totally false.
She completely made it up.
Proven to have made it up.
Ruined those kids' lives, but completely made it up.
Al Sharpton got his career because he championed Tawana Brawley, who said she had been raped by a white guy.
Guess what happened?
Totally made up.
A total lie.
The left never apologizes for it.
Al Sharpton never apologizes for it.
There are false accusations.
Would that we could believe all women?
I would love it if we could believe every woman who said that she had been raped.
Rape is a horrible crime.
If we could believe all women, it would make it a lot easier to prevent it, to stop it, to get justice for the people who perpetrate it.
But we can't because there are constantly false rape allegations often peddled by the media.
So you can't believe all women.
Why does the left want us to believe all women?
Because this is a tool that That they use any time they don't like a guy.
In 1991, at the confirmation of Clarence Thomas, he's an excellent candidate.
He's got an impeccable legal background.
He's a totally upright guy.
They can't stop Clarence Thomas, the most originalist justice probably ever on the Supreme Court.
So what do they do?
They make up a sexual harassment claim against him.
And they bring Anita Hill over.
And now they turn Anita Hill into a saint.
And Anita Hill's testimony totally collapses, does not hold up to scrutiny.
There's no evidence that he did any of those things.
And now he's tarnished.
His reputation is still tarnished.
They still think of him as some sort of sexual predator.
Brett Kavanaugh, zero evidence that this guy ever...
Assaulted women was improper.
This guy lived one of the squeakiest, cleanest lives probably in politics.
Federal judge for 12 years.
Never a peep about this.
On one of the most important courts in the country, on the D.C. Circuit.
Never a peep.
But then President Trump nominates him for the Supreme Court.
And all of a sudden, well now he's a rapist.
Because it's so heinous and because the left has set up this culture where you have to believe all women.
You take an accusation as evidence itself.
An accusation is not evidence.
An accusation is an accusation.
Then you need evidence to justify that.
And you see that happening here as well.
This is a major problem.
George Will, a number of years ago, came out and he said this culture of just automatically believing accusations on campuses now, depriving the accused of their due process rights, so students who are accused of rape or sexual assault, that matter isn't handled by the criminal justice system in virtually that matter isn't handled by the criminal justice system in virtually 100% of
In virtually 100% of cases, it's handled by kangaroo courts of professors and deans and administrators and bureaucrats who have absolutely no right to be handling them, no expertise in handling these cases, and they deprive the accused of due process.
That's not how it's supposed to work in the United States.
When George Will pointed out that this was unjust, pointed out that oppression and victimhood carries currency these days, which is encouraging this sort of behavior, He was accused by Elizabeth Warren, among other senators, of not taking rape and sexual assault seriously.
And what George Will said was what we should all say when we point out that you need evidence to back up an allegation.
He said, on the contrary, senators, I think I take rape and sexual assault much more seriously than you do.
New York Magazine thinks because they run some totally baseless allegation from 23 years ago that's just coming up now, just coincidentally while this woman is trying to sell a book, they think that they're taking sexual assault seriously.
They're getting it out in the open.
They're airing this news.
CNN taking it very seriously.
You're not.
When you air these totally baseless allegations without any evidence, you are doing exactly the opposite.
You are damaging the credibility of every other woman who has been sexually assaulted or raped.
You are making it much, much harder to believe them because of hoaxes, because of cynical people, because of people trying to peddle books without any evidence whatsoever.
Shame on them.
Shame on CNN. Shame on this woman.
Shame on the people who are believing this without any evidence.
Speaking of false claims in politics, Ilhan Omar's story on her strange marriages is falling apart.
Looks like she almost certainly committed immigration fraud and she might have done it with her brother, which is very, very gross.
We will examine the new evidence that has come to light and we'll interview Ilhan Omar to see what she thinks about this.
We'll at least interview her as much as any other outlet has been able to interview her, which is absolutely not at all.
I think my next book is going to be Ilhan Omar's defense against the charges that she committed immigration fraud, a comprehensive guide.
We'll get to all of that and a whole lot more, but first I've got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
Go over to dailywire.com.
Ten bucks a month.
One hundred dollars for an annual membership.
You get me.
You get the Andrew Klavan show.
You get the Ben Shapiro show.
You get the Matt Walsh show.
You get to ask questions in the mailbag.
You get another kingdom.
You get to ask questions backstage.
You get everything.
You get everything.
And the leftist tears tumbler.
That sounds like...
Oh yeah.
That sounds like a rising star Democrat congresswoman commits immigration fraud.
That tastes like...
Pete Buttigieg is being called a racist by Democrats and by his own constituents.
That sounds like...
Mmm.
That just tastes so, so good.
Make sure you get yours so you can drink them up.
Go to dailywire.com.
We'll be back with a lot more.
Ilhan Omar probably married her brother.
So she at least almost certainly committed immigration fraud, but she also probably married her brother.
This rumor has been going around for a couple years now, and the mainstream media will not pick it up.
They won't run with it.
It's only conservative media who have been saying, this woman's got a weird marital history.
It looks like she had a sham marriage.
It looks like she did it to gain U.S. immigration policy.
It looks like the guy might have been her brother.
The mainstream media wouldn't look into it, wouldn't look into the evidence.
Now we've got serious reports out that she did it.
New legal documents uncovered show the timeline.
This is all very confusing, as are most things that Ilhan Omar is involved in.
Here's the timeline.
2002, Ilhan Omar married a guy named Ahmed Hirsi in a religious ceremony.
Not a legal ceremony.
They were not legally married, but religiously they were.
Six years later, 2008, Omar and Hirsi allegedly, quote, decided to end our relationship in our faith tradition.
This raises a question.
They were married for six years religiously, but not married legally.
Why not?
What were they doing for six years?
And then if the relationship sours, they decide to end their relationship.
Okay, I guess it's convenient that they were never legally married.
Early in 2009, Omar then legally marries a guy named Ahmed Nur Saeed Elmi.
So she's never been married before, legally, so that's not a big deal.
It's a little fast, though.
She ends her relationship with her husband, or at least, according to religious tradition, husband of six years, and then immediately gets married to this guy, Ahmed Nur Saeed Elmi.
Stranger things have happened, but the timing's a little weird.
Two years later, Omar and Elmi religiously divorce.
Now, not legally divorced.
They're still legally married, but they religiously divorce.
And that same year, Omar and Hirsi reconcile.
So Omar and Hirsi are married religiously for six years.
Then they break up and Omar immediately legally marries another guy for two years.
Then religiously separates from the other guy and immediately reconciles with her religious husband of six years.
And they get back together.
together.
Okay, a little strange.
Then, in 2017, so six years later, Omar and Elmi legally divorce.
So they've been legally married for eight years.
Even though they've only ostensibly been together for two years.
And she's been with this other guy for all but two years of that, since 2002.
Then, in 2018, one year after she legally divorces Elmi, she legally marries Percy.
Who she was religiously married to for six years, then split for a couple years, then got back together with for another six or seven years.
Okay, little strange.
So that, that was what we already knew.
And the mainstream media wouldn't report on it because they like Ilhan Omar so much.
And if you ever question anything she does, you're accused of racism and xenophobia and Islamophobia, whatever.
Legal documents now show that Omar was living with Hersey, her first husband, in 2009.
That's a year after she says that they split up, and that was the same year that she married Elmi, and that was two years before she says she reconciled with Hersey.
So now nothing about either of these timelines makes sense.
It gets even worse.
Omar and Hersey, the first husband, the real husband, then probably not her brother husband, also filed joint taxes together in 2014 and 2015.
So Omar and Hersey, this is wrong and bizarre for two reasons.
One, they were supposed to be broken up.
Omar and Hersey were not legally married at this time, and you're not supposed to file joint taxes if you're not legally married.
But at the same time, Omar was legally married to Elmi.
So if she's going to file joint taxes with anybody, it should be with Elmi.
Elmi, you think, might be a little upset that his wife is filing joint taxes with another man, ostensibly her ex-husband and her future husband, her ex-ex-husband.
Then it gets even worse somehow.
Under penalty of perjury, during divorce proceedings, Ilhan Omar said that she had not contacted or known the whereabouts of Elmi since the summer of 2011, because the courts are looking for Elmi.
They said, wait a second, something doesn't sit right here.
We've got to make sure that this...
Divorce is legitimate, that this marriage was legitimate in the first place, that it wasn't just a sham, because these sort of sham marriages happen all the time to game the immigration system.
So she says she hadn't seen Elmi.
She didn't know his whereabouts since 2011.
But photos on social media show they did see each other.
Now, Ilhan Omar's daughters are all by the other guy, the real husband, not the brother.
Photos on social media show, he was around, he saw this guy Elmi, was around, saw the kids, saw Ilhan Omar, well after the time that she says was the last time she saw him.
She lied.
We know she lied.
It has been proven that she lied about very important questions.
She lied about criminal activity that she did.
She at least filed taxes incorrectly.
Now, this new report that's come out could not determine conclusively whether or not Elmi was Omar's brother.
Why do they even think that this guy Elmi was Omar's brother?
Because there are lots of ties, there are a lot of weird connections between the two, similarities in names.
And also, after Omar allegedly disappeared, he turns up working for and with Omar's sister, Which would also be his sister, if they're brother and sister, which I think they probably are.
And you would think at least, if Ilhan Omar is looking for her long-lost ex-husband, and the guy's working with her sister, you'd think the sister might tell her, right?
Don't you think that's something that would come up at family dinners?
Probably.
The whole thing stinks to high heaven.
It's beyond stinking to high heaven.
We know that she's committed crimes.
She almost certainly committed immigration fraud.
Is the mainstream media going to look into this?
Because they're trying their best to deflect.
They're trying their best not to follow up on this information which conservatives have been pushing for a long time now.
What you are going to see in the reaction to this is that any attack on Ilhan Omar is motivated by bigotry.
It's motivated because we don't like Muslims.
We don't like immigrants.
We don't like foreigners.
They're going to say, focus on her policies.
Well, okay, we focus on her policies.
And then they say that we're, they accuse us of the same things.
When we say that it's wrong of her to pray that Allah wakens people up to the evil doings of Israel, that's policy.
We're saying your policy toward Israel is really weird and obviously brings up a lot of questions about your motivations.
And they say, that's Islamophobia.
Okay, we won't talk about your policy.
We'll talk about your personal life.
You clearly committed tax fraud and immigration fraud.
They say, stop talking about that.
Talk about the policy.
You're not allowed to attack Ilhan Omar for any reason.
This chick is bad news for the Democratic Party.
And we're going to see in 2020 and maybe 2022 the referendums on these people because these are the young guns of the Democrats.
These are the fresh new faces.
They get all the airtime.
Nancy Pelosi never gets airtime, but Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar get all of the airtime.
And she's causing, all of them are causing a lot of headaches for the Democratic Party.
If the Democrats primary them in 2020, if they throw them out, if they defund them, if they redistrict them and get rid of their districts, then we will see that the Democratic Party is serious about kicking out these radicals who are causing so much trouble.
If they can't, if they can't manage to primary, kick out, redistrict these people, all of whom are personally totally deficient candidates, who are totally compromised, some of whom have committed crimes.
If they can't do that, then we know for certain this is their party now.
This is Ilhan Omar's party.
This is Rashida Tlaib's party.
This is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's party.
That when the DNC chairman Tom Perez said that AOC is the future of the party, he was right.
Pelosi's lost control.
Clinton's lost control.
All of these presidential candidates have lost control.
That is what it's going to tell us.
You almost could not possibly come up with a worse story for a member of Congress.
Committed all of these crimes, major crimes.
If we can't hold them accountable for this, we are in much worse shape than we thought that we were.
Speaking of weird sexual relations, how's that for a segue from Ilhan Omar's brother to pedophilia?
There is now, it's actually a year old story, but it's just making the rounds now.
There is a TEDx talk going around that proves something that conservatives have been saying for a long time.
We've said, as a result of the sexual revolution, as a result of normalizing all sorts of weird sexual preferences, as a result of saying that you can't hold any view of sexual morality that doesn't affirm everybody's desires, love is love, or if it feels good, do it.
As a result of this, the logical conclusion is we're going to normalize pedophilia.
People were born that way.
They can't change their sexual orientation.
We need patience.
We need to bring it under the umbrella of all the other sexual preferences.
We've been saying that and the left has been calling us crazy.
Now TEDx is hosting a talk on this exact point.
Miriam Hain, a medical student from Germany, is presenting her controversial paper on the subject of, quote, why our perception of pedophilia has to change.
Give it a listen.
According to current research, pedophilia is an unchangeable sexual orientation, just like, for example, heterosexuality.
No one chooses to be a pedophile.
No one can cease being one.
The difference between pedophilia and other sexual orientations is that living out this sexual orientation will end in a disaster.
Right now, most of us feel discomfort when we think about this scenario.
And most of us feel discomfort when we think about pedophiles.
But just like pedophiles, we are not responsible for our feelings.
We do not choose them.
But we are responsible for our actions.
And we must make a decision.
It is in our responsibility to reflect and to overcome our negative feelings about pedophiles and to treat them with the same respect we treat other people with.
We should accept that pedophiles are people who have not chosen their sexuality and who, unlike most of us, will never be able to live it out freely if they want to lead an upright life.
We have to overcome our negative feelings toward pedophiles.
I will say, if I had to cast anybody in the world to Present the argument for normalizing pedophilia.
I would normalize that woman who sounds exactly like a Bond villain.
Satisfy, Mr.
Bond.
We must accept the pedophilia and the abuse of children for the new world order, Mr.
Bond.
There's a beautiful accent.
Thank you for having that, Miriam.
Her argument If you begin with the premises that the cultural revolution, the sexual revolution that the left has embraced, if you begin with those premises that we can't judge sexual orientation and sexual preferences, that there is no normative good and normative bad when it comes to sexual preference, if you begin with that premise, her argument is exactly correct.
Pedophiles, as far as we can tell, are born that way.
They don't choose to be attracted to children.
Who would choose to be attracted to children?
Nobody.
It's a horrible life, right?
It puts you at risk of committing a lot of crimes.
It socially isolates you.
It makes you, in almost all cases, incapable of sexual gratification or fulfillment.
If Why on earth would we judge pedophiles?
I mean, you even hear this consent language at the very end here.
She says, pedophiles will never be able to act on their sexual urges if they want to lead an upright life.
What if they don't want to lead an upright life?
Then they can act on it?
No, we have laws against that.
We must have laws against that.
This is sexual autonomy taken to its logical conclusion.
And it's funny that this is making the rounds again during Pride Month, which celebrates not just homosexuality, not bisexuality, not anything like that.
It celebrates all sorts of sexuality and asexuality and no sexuality and everything.
The premise being, you cannot judge somebody's sexual preferences as good or bad.
And that includes pedophiles.
The only alternative to this conclusion is, of course, you can judge sexual preferences.
It's the alternative to pride, which is shame.
Everybody has some weird sexual preferences.
And you can either say that those preferences are wrong in and of themselves, like pedophilia, Or you can say no sexual preference can be right or wrong.
Because take child abuse out of it.
We're just talking about the preferences.
And I bet if you talk to a lot of leftists today and you said, hey, let's say there's a pedophile.
He's never abused a child.
He's never going to abuse a child.
But he is really attracted to children.
And he doesn't even download child pornography.
He just has an artist, just an artist, draw him child pornography.
So no children are even hurt in the production of it.
Should the pedophile be allowed to look at drawn images of children having sex or being sexually abused?
Let's say there are sex robots now.
Should the pedophile be allowed to have sex with a sex robot that looks like a child if he's never going to abuse an actual child?
And if you ask the left that question, their gut reaction would say, of course not.
Of course he shouldn't be allowed to do that.
But the logical end of their arguments, I think, would say, yeah, of course he should.
Doesn't hurt anybody.
He's indulging his own fantasies.
That's fine.
Are we going to indulge these sorts of preferences and these sorts of fantasies or not?
Are we allowed to have a more sophisticated discourse about sexual morality and say, well, this is bad.
Maybe this isn't so bad.
It's not great.
This is a little weird.
Maybe you shouldn't do that.
Are we allowed to have the discussions we've had about sexual morality for all of human history?
Or are we in a world in which you are called a bigot if you raise objections even to a pedophile orientation?
That's the question we're having, and I think the culture is clearly moving in the direction of this Bond villain from Germany.
Before we go, I've got to talk about Pete Buttigieg.
Pete Buttigieg is losing his luster.
He's facing Beto syndrome.
The media embraced him.
They loved him.
He was the next big thing.
Now reality is swinging back around.
He was at a town hall...
And his constituents in South Bend, Indiana don't like that he's spending all his time running for president.
Sure.
Sure.
So let's, one last question for Mayor Pete and Chief Scott.
You hear that person yelling, are you going to go back to South Carolina like you were there yesterday?
And they said, one more question for Mayor Pete.
Mayor Pete doesn't have a word to say.
So he's getting hit for being on the road too much, not doing his job in South Bend.
He's also getting hit with Black Lives Matter accusations.
So there was a fatal police shooting last week of a man named Eric J. Logan, a 54-year-old black man.
He was killed by a cop.
The cop said he had a knife on him.
We don't know if he had a knife on him or not.
The reason it's suspect is the body camera was off and there were no witnesses to the cop shooting this guy.
Also, there are allegations already recorded of this guy's fellow cops saying that the cop had been making racist comments in the past.
So South Bend residents are angry about this, especially black residents.
And Mayor Pete doesn't know how to answer the anger.
Can you say to us today in front of all these cameras that black lives matter?
Did you just ask me if black lives matter?
Yes.
What do you want to hear you say?
Of course, black lives matter.
Then fire your car.
What about a black life?
What matters about a black life to you, Mayor Pence?
What matters about a black life to you?
Answer that or it's just nothing.
Answer that.
I do not have evidence that there has been discipline for racist behavior in the case of order.
Brutal.
So obviously there's no evidence that Pete Buttigieg is some sort of racial bigot.
And obviously this shooting is not Pete Buttigieg's fault.
The shooting is compounded by the fact that Buttigieg wasn't there on the job because he's running for president.
So that does hurt.
It also shows a weakness in his campaign.
He's not woke enough.
He thought that by playing up the gay card, He could get rid of all of his other issues, all of his other privileges.
He's a white Harvard grad, Rhodes scholar, former analyst for an elite consulting firm, McKinsey, who looks like Alfred E. Newman.
This guy is the picture of privilege, and he's pretending that because he's sexually attracted to men, this cancels that out, and he's woke.
He isn't woke enough, and I never thought he was woke enough, and they've been asking this question about him on the left for a while.
This also shows an important rule in politics.
If you live by contrivance, you will die by contrivance.
Pete Buttigieg is a totally contrived candidate who is totally being propped up by the left-wing elite media.
Black Lives Matter, too, is not exactly a grassroots movement.
It has been propped up artificially by the media, by people who are major activists in the Democratic Party.
And one contrivance is about to take down another contrivance.
That is bad news for Pete Buttigieg and more bad news for Pete Buttigieg.
Elizabeth Warren is surging.
Liawath is coming out.
She's embracing her wokeness.
She's going all the way in.
She's gunning to win that progressive election.
Vote which led to the most ridiculous line that I have heard in politics in at least three or four days.
Happy birthday dear Senator Warren!
Happy birthday to you.
Woo!
Woo!
I was going to sing.
I'm going to sing.
Better way to sing my birthday than write your plan here.
Woo!
We celebrate together.
Yay.
I don't know if you could hear that.
She said, what better place to spend my birthday than right here at Planned Parenthood?
Which is, it's pretty dark.
I don't want to laugh at it.
What better place to spend your birthday than at Planned Parenthood?
Any other place.
Planned Parenthood is the worst place on planet Earth to spend your birthday.
The entire purpose of Planned Parenthood is to prevent birthdays.
But that's absurdity.
That's the absurdity of left-wing politics.
And Liz Warren looks like she is surging for the mantle of it.
Bad news for Buttigieg.
Good news for her.
The absurdity is only going to get worse as we look forward to the first Democratic presidential primary debate coming up in just a matter of days.
Can't wait for it.
In the meantime, I'm Michael Knowles.
This is The Michael Knowles Show.
show.
I'll see you tomorrow.
The Michael Knowles Show is produced by Rebecca Dobkowitz and directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
And our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Edited by Danny D'Amico.
Audio is mixed by Dylan Case.
Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera.
And our production assistant is Nick Sheehan.
The Michael Knowles Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
Hey guys, over on the Matt Wall Show, Representative Ilhan Omar is accused now of marrying her brother in order to skirt our immigration laws.
A very bizarre, weird situation, but if it's true, she committed a serious crime.
Is it true though?
Well, we'll take a look at the evidence and you decide.
Also, speaking of looking at evidence, President Trump is accused again of sexual assault.
▲
Export Selection