In Friday’s episode of “The Michael Knowles Show,” Michael suggests that the Democrats don’t really care about Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault, and what they are really doing.
“Brett Kavanaugh is replacing Anthony Kennedy. Kennedy is the swing vote. Kennedy was the squish. Brett Kavanaugh appears to be more rock ribbed than him. This will fundamentally change the composition of the court and they're out for blood,” Knowles said. “This is largely about Democrats’ abortion lust. This is largely about how insistent they are that we preserve the fictitious constitutional right to kill a baby in the womb, but that's why they're reacting this way to Kavanagh instead of Gorsuch and every lefty who's bringing up that comparison knows it. Every major lefty, every lefty analyst, or elected official and they're just being obtuse.”
Video and transcript below:
And therefore you're telling the truth in relating the truth correctly about an allegation that happened 36 years ago that no one has ever heard of until five seconds ago, because, you know, you go to Palo Alto University or whatever.
By the way, I don't remember them introducing Brett Kavanaugh this way. I'm pretty impressed with Brett Kavanaugh’s CV: Yale undergrad. Yale Law School. Clerked for the Supreme Court Staff secretary to the president. Worked on a Ken Starr investigation, which is what a lot of this is about, because the Clinton world is getting revenge and Democrats are getting revenge for that whole episode and they're trying to flip it on a sex issue.
Then, what, federal judge? Then, you know, he's on one of the most powerful courts in the country; DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
And now a Supreme Court nominee.
That's a pretty good CV. I don't remember them talking [about that], oh but she attends Palo Alto University or she's affiliated with Palo Alto.
Okay. Wow. Incredible.
So, the reason they did that is because they want to say that she's this serious person.
Look, she's a professor okay. And no crazy people ever become professors, right?
No. Like we don't have an entire character trope in popular culture of the wacky crazy professor pie-in-the-sky politicized whatever. No, she's a professor of Palo Alto University. She couldn't be lying.
So, they go down that path. They want to say she's a super serious person, but then they realized they have to make her really likeable and sweet and innocent and cute so they're trying to do two things at once and it doesn't quite work.
When I heard at the top of these hearings, one of the first things Christine Ford had said made me really question what was going on here.
Here’s right at the top of her hearings when they introduced her
Okay. Oh is she?
(Mimics her voice) Well if you anticipated it, then bring a cup of coffee to the hearing. You just said you anticipated. You anticipate it? Or have a shot of espresso before you sit down. No. I just might need some caffeine. I might need a break after this. If you guys start grilling me I don't want to answer those questions hee hee hee hee I'm so cute.
They're trying to play it both ways and by the way, we should be very blunt about this because there's the question of this political disgusting disgraceful circus where they rip down a good man who's never had any of these allegations laid against him until he was in the position to swing the court to be more a right wing, to be more originalist.
They asked: Why didn't this happen with Neil Gorsuch? Neil Gorsuch was replacing Antonin Scalia. It's hard to get more hardcore an originalist than Scalia, so it doesn't change the makeup of the court.
Brett Kavanaugh is replacing Anthony Kennedy. Kennedy is the swing vote. Kennedy was the squish. Brett Kavanaugh appears to be more rock ribbed than him. This will fundamentally change the composition of the court and they're out for blood. This is largely about Democrats’ abortion lust. This is largely about how insistent they are that we preserve the fictitious constitutional right to kill a baby in the womb, but that's why they're reacting this way to Kavanagh instead of Gorsuch and every lefty who's bringing up that comparison knows it. Every major lefty, every lefty analyst, or elected official and they're just being obtuse.
But as to the matter, did Brett Kavanaugh grope this girl super drunk in 1982 or whenever, we have no reason to believe that. That's true.
Everyone who has been called on as a witness to the event or around the time has said this isn't true or I don't remember or I’ve never met Brett Kavanaugh. They, including the girl that she says was there so..
But also, I don't care. I actually don't care what happened to 1982. I feel bad for her if something happened in 1982. I wish she'd told someone sooner, so whatever guy was being aggressive with her could have been punished for it, but I don't care. I know nobody cares by the way. Nobody cares. Not a single person on that Judiciary Committee cares. Not a single Democrat, who's demagoguing cares. They are just making an issue out of this to keep an originalist off of the court.