>> Ben Shapiro has weighed in on sexual assault
allegations against Brett Kavanaugh.
Now, of course, this is in response to the
New York Times printing excerpts from a book
that details some of the allegations by a
former classmate, Deborah Ramirez.
Now, Shapiro has an interesting request when
it comes to the story.
Take a look.
>> We've had a bevy of public figures in recent
years.
Who have had their genitalia described on
national television by people who alleged
sexual assault, right?
Stormy Daniels famously described President
Trump's genitalia, Bill Clinton's genitalia.
Details of such were talked about.
Nobody has yet described Kavanaugh's genitalia.
Now, that's not just positive, maybe they
were generic, who knows.
But the bottom line is we've had no corroborating
details on any of these stories.
All of them apparently happened in public
places with other witnesses available.
And not one witness has been there who corroborates
any of these stories.
It's unbelievable.
And yet the democrats are still saying that
Kavanaugh should be kicked off the Supreme
Court, based on what?
A new report from a guy who says that he was
at a party and saw a male grab Cavanaugh's
penis, which, by the way, would be sexual
assault.
And then thrust it into the hand of a female
who says she doesn't remember the incident.
It seems like you might remember that incident.
Just gonna put that out there.
I think any normal person would probably remember
that and have called by the New York Times.
Were you at a party where someone grabbed
somebody's junk and thrust it into your hand?
Seems like it might be memorable.
>> So he wants the description of Kavanaugh's
penis in order to prove that this alledged
sexual assault actually happened?
>> People would be thirty.
>> Yeah, it's an interesting take.
Also, I just wanna note, the way the right
wing completely skews the reporting by the
New York Times is infuriating.
And everyone should read, by the way, don't
trust anyone, don't even trust us.
You should read the piece for yourself.
And if you don't have, let me give you a relative
portion of it.
To respond to Ben Shapiro's nonsense about
a lack of corroborating witnesses.
So, Deborah Ramirez's legal team gave the
FBI a list of at least 25 individuals who
may have had corroborating evidence.
But the bureau, in its supplemental background
investigation, interviewed none of them.
Though we learned many of these potential
witnesses had tried in vain to reach out to
the FBI on their own.
So there were corroborating witnesses.
It's just that we didn't hear much about them
from the right wing, of course, I mean, we
wouldn't expect to, anyway.
But the FBI didn't even bother to interview
them, because the republicans severely limited
the scope of that investigation.
>> And Shapiro's conflating a number of different
stories, so Christine Blasey Ford had the
alleged attempt of rape against her.
But there was no evidence there, as far as
I remember, that he'd gotten to the point
where he'd taken his pants off.
But he makes it seem like well, if these stories
were true, everybody would have seen every
intimate detail of his genitalia and would
be able to describe it.
And then in the Deborah Ramirez story, The
New York Times explains that there are seven
people who heard about that story.
Including two Yale classmates, a couple of
days after the party.
And so well before Kavanaugh was a federal
judge, let alone nominated for the Supreme
Court, back when it actually did happen.
That you wanna make a case, a legitimate case,
and say, look, they heard about the story,
but they didn't necessarily witness the story.
And say, hey, I wish as a Republican that
the FBI had investigated further and talk
to those 25 witnesses cuz I'm sure Kavanaugh
is innocent.
And if they had, they would have been able
to confirm that, well, that would be a legitimate
interesting point to make.
Instead, he brings in a third story of a different
Yale party where apparently, Kavanaugh, some
people say, including a guy who runs a nonprofit
in Washington DC.
That Kavanaug throws his penis into the hand
of that other woman, a third woman, and she
says she doesn't recollect that.
Now, so that's not about Ramirez and that's
not about Christine Blasey Ford.
He just jumbles it all in there and says,
you'd think you'd remember that.
>> Right.
>> And then-
>> And then dismissises everything because
no woman has yet to describe intimate details
of Bret Kavanaugh's genitals.
>> Yeah.
>> Is that the smart commentary that the right
wing gives Ben Shapiro credit for?
Is that the Wizkid intelligence and brilliance
that we can exect, come on.
>> Yeah, so, look I mean, we really have to
have a debate about this?
But the fact that he's like, I need to know
the details of his penis.
>> We have heard about the genitalia of various
public figures throughout the year.
Various politicians, but we haven't heard
about the penis of Brett Kavanaugh's.
I want to know.
Was it large, was it small?
Did it lean to left, did it lean to the right?
We don't know, we don't know.
Therefore I can't believe any of these allegations.
And now I'm gonna conflate three different
stories to make it seem like this story didn't
even exist.
That no sexual assault took place.
He's such a clown and it's so frustrating.
>> Yeah, so, lastly.
Is this the new standard, is this the new
right wing standard?
In order to prove rape or sexual assault,
you must accurately describe the penis of
your assailant.
Could it be that it was dark?
Could it be that it was one of the most traumatic
moments of your life if not the most dramatic
in a great majority of the cases?
And know, if you don't sketch out the penis
for Ben Shapiro, apparently it didn't happen.
Preposterous as usual.
