Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 164 | Kavanaugh Continued

Episode Date: September 18, 2019

Here we go again: Democrats are calling for Kavanaugh's impeachment after a botched NYT story rehashed a sexual assault allegation from last year. What does this saga say about how society today views justice and morality?

Hey, this is Steve Day. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort.

We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch this Steve Day's show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. I hope everyone's having a wonderful week. Today we are going to discuss the botched Kavanaugh allegations issued by the New York Times over the weekend

and then how we should view stories like this as well as the wider Me Too movement. Hey, this is Steve Dase. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand. that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news

of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality. We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for

commentary grounded in conviction, and unwilling to lie to you about where we are, or where we're headed, you can watch this Steve Day Show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Okay, let's go ahead and talk about all of this craziness. So for those of you who are listening to my podcast a year ago where you were following me on social media a year ago, you know that I passionately followed and commentated on the Kavanaugh drama that happened, I think almost exactly a year ago this week. That's when all of that started. If you don't know if last year you were living under a rock or something, I've brought.

Brett Kavanaugh was nominated by President Trump to the Supreme Court. Soon after his nomination, it was announced by Senator Dianne Feinstein from California that she had received allegations of sexual assault from a high school classmate of Kavanaugh's named Christine Blasey Ford. The media trotted out a couple other women who also had accusations against Kavanaugh, one named Julie Swetnik, whose attorney was the very credible and honorable. Michael Avanotti. She claimed an Avanati put out in a press release or something that Kavanaugh was a part of a ganggraping group at parties that she attended while Kavanaugh was in college and she was in high school and that he would line up outside a room and he would take his turn with whatever young lady was intoxicated in the room. She later was interviewed by NSNBC and she admitted that she didn't actually know if Kavanaugh was at these parties or if he took part in any of the behavior that she had described. to Avanotti. So that's great. Deborah Ramirez was a Yale classmate and accused Kavanaugh of

exposing himself to her at a party. But she only came up with this accusation after six days spent with her lawyers. She at first said she didn't know if it was Kavanaugh or not, but then after she hashed all of this out with her lawyers over the span of about weeks, she said, oh yes, this thing that happened 30 years ago, it was definitely Brett Kavanaugh. So there is no evidence at all to corroborate not only these stories, but also the big. biggest story or the story that got the most publicity, Blasey Ford's. There were details missing from her testimony. Her lawyer was a lawyer for Hillary Clinton that, of course, doesn't automatically mean that she was telling a lie, but it makes it a little bit more suspect or it kind of makes

us think a little bit harder. She may have not been lying. I mean, we weren't there, so no one is going to know for sure. But the facts simply were not on her side. And that's the truth of the matter. And even though we were not in a court of law or they were not in a court of law, America does have the principle of due process and of innocent until proven guilty. And most conservatives believed that Kavanaugh should get to enjoy that right in these hearings, especially since Balsie Ford lacked substantial evidence. If you want a more detailed account of what happened last year, I did an episode, it was episode 38 of Relatable, titled Before Believing Kavanaugh's Accuser,

as a refresher, here's a part of Ford's testimony, followed by a part of Kavanaugh's testimony. I believed he was going to rape me. I tried to yell for help. When I did, Brett put his hand over my mouth to stop me from yelling. This is what terrified me the most and has had the most lasting impact on my life. It was hard for me to breathe. And I thought that Brett was accidentally going to kill me. at a time when I'm called evil by a Democratic member of this committee, while Democratic opponents of my nomination say people will die if I am confirmed. This onslaught of last-minute allegations does not ring true. I'm not questioning that Dr. Ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in some place at some time.

but I have never done this to her or to anyone. That's not who I am. It is not who I was. I am innocent of this charge. I intend no ill will to Dr. Ford and her family. The other night, Ashley and my daughter, Liza, said their prayers. And little Liza, all 10 years old, said to Ashley, we should pray for the woman. It's a lot of wisdom from a 10-year-olds.

We mean no ill will. So I remember I was in the Washington Reagan Airport watching this on my computer. I even watched it on the plane, and I kept on refreshing my page to make sure I could get as good of Wi-Fi as I could possibly get so I wouldn't miss anything. And while I did, I remember, I found Ford very compelling. She was obviously very vulnerable and very emotional. So I found that somewhat convincing. But then when I watched Kavanaugh's testimony, it was totally over. only his passion, but every detail of his defense. His wife, this is, you know, of course,

a more emotional perspective, but his wife sitting behind him tearing up. I was just completely undone by the whole thing. I just kind of lost it. I just, I couldn't take it anymore. After watching Kavanaugh's testimony, thinking about what the Democrats in Congress and a lot of people on the left had done to him just dragged him and his family in his name through the mud based on a story that they don't even know is true. Someone told me later that they felt that I had been radicalized after the whole Kavanaugh saga. And I think that is actually true. I think that for the first time, I saw that some people on the left, they're purely political motives, at least, well, I will say partly political motives, pushed them to decimate a man's career or tried to

decimate a man's career and a man's reputation to get what they want. They were perfectly okay with ruining a man's life, a man with a sternly reputation throughout every stage of his career thus far because they were afraid of how he would rule on cases that mattered to them. That was just too far for me. I didn't want to envision a world in which that became the norm. I didn't know what kind of justice he would be exactly. There was a lot of conflicting evidence for whether or not he was a strict constitutionalist. It doesn't really seem like he is. I, of course, was very open about the fact that I wanted him to lean in the anti-abortion direction, anti-plan parenthood direction. And I do hope that Kavanaugh will be on the correct side for these kinds of cases,

but I don't really, I don't know what I didn't really know back then. What got me about all of this, what really pushed me over the edge was the cruel nature and the relentlessness of some of his opposition that showed me a picture of partisan divisiveness in America that I just can't stomach, that I just don't want to tolerate, one where we are perfectly fine with ruining people's lives, destroying their families, ruining their reputations based on stories that don't even add up and have no cooperation whatsoever just because we may not like their politics. I didn't want to live in a world like that. A world without due process, a world where if you fall on the more privileged side of the intersectionality scale,

then your credibility is automatically shot. It doesn't matter if the story doesn't add up or not. It doesn't matter if the facts don't align. You are automatically because of your politics, because of where your station is in the world, you are automatically disbelieved. I don't want to live in a world like that. I don't want that for either side. I don't want that for someone who is on the laughter or someone who is on the right. I don't want that for your family. I don't want that for your career.

I don't want your life to be ruined just because I disagree with you or just because I don't like you. That is unjust. And I truly, I don't want injustice for anyone. And that includes Kavanaugh. That's why I was so worked up about this whole thing. If political enemies are willing to do that, if they're willing to go that far, then that means they will stop at nothing.

They won't care if your kids are harassed at school now because of unsubstantiated claims about you. They won't care if you can never go in public again without being assaulted. They will not care if you lose your job. They will not care if the story is true or not. If it fits the narrative, they will bully as many people as possible into helping them make your life miserable. believe women was the mantra of these people. And I really, I can't think of a more patronizing or less just idea than that or mantra than that or worldview than that. Why should we automatically believe a woman? Okay, your friend maybe or someone whose character that you know,

someone that you trust really well, maybe you'll automatically believe them and that's fine. But why should we believe all women just because they're a woman, no matter what? We should weigh the facts and testimonies we have and do our best to come up with. with a judicious conclusion, but that doesn't mean that we have to believe someone just because of what genitalia they have. A believe woman only makes sense if you do not believe in objective truth. And unfortunately, a lot of the opposition and just a lot of people on the left, that's the nature of leftism in general, is that they don't believe in absolute truth. Remember, as AOC said it is more important. It is okay to be morally right and factually incorrect.

Joe Biden said something similar. He said the truth is more important. than facts. We now live in a world, apparently, where we can separate truth from facts and we can decide which one fits our narrative and go that direction. So that's what we see a lot of people who not just opposed Kavanaugh, but just people in the media in general do. They have a conclusion that they've decided is morally right. And then they will fit facts into that conclusion and throw the facts out that don't fit into that conclusion and make things up and present them as fact to support that conclusion. So rather than supporting the facts and then allowing you to come up with the conclusion, they start out with a foregone conclusion and then they fit the different points to fit into that.

That is reporting today. And of course, the whole Kavanaugh thing was no exception. We saw this in the New York Times over the weekend in their opinion section, which has truly been, even CNN is saying this, truly been in disarray for a few years now. A piece written by Kate Kelly and Robin Pograben, I can't say that I know how to pronounce. her last name revealed by revealed another woman, an allegation by another woman by the name of Harmon Joyce that, that said that Kavanaugh also exposed himself to her at a party. The article was adapted from their book, The Education of Brett Kavanaugh. Apparently they have been investigating him for the past 10 months.

But in this article in the New York Times, they left out a key point that Molly Hemingway, she works at the Federalist. She had already read an advanced copy of this book. She pointed it out on Twitter that this alleged victim, that they were talking about in this article never agreed to be interviewed, so they never even talked to her. Later, she said that she didn't recall this incident at all that they're talking about. The only person who said that this happened was Max Steyer. He was a classmate, and he's a lawyer that is now connected to the Clintons, and he actually didn't even provide them with the account

that they used. Other people who communicated with Steyer and then communicated with these authors were the ones who provided this account. So when this was pointed out, the New York Times issued a correction, you know, post script, clarifying all of this. But of course, the damage had already been done. This seems to be a pattern, not just by the New York Times, but also the Washington Post to write something completely erroneous, get everyone worked up about it, raise hysteria, and then say, oh, just kidding. Sorry, that wasn't actually true.

But people have already started freaking out and doesn't matter. And that's exactly what we saw in this whole thing. After the article was published, every single Democratic candidate called for his impeachment. In addition to other Democrats who are in Congress, every liberal news network went crazy with the allegations. Democrats are still going in on this. They're still insisting that he needs to be impeached despite the fact that these allegations are even weaker than the first allegations that we heard about a year ago. Ayana Presley, she's a Democratic member of the House. She is part of the squad with Ilhan Omar, AOC, Rashida Talib. She is filing

an impeachment resolution. She said on above a... Boston public radio station, sexual predators do not deserve a seat on the nation's highest court. And Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation process set a dangerous precedent. She also said, we must demand justice for survivors and hold Kavanaugh accountable for his actions, except that we don't actually have any evidence for his actions. We don't even have any kind of cynical testimony to say that there are grounds for

impeachment. And yet we're running with this anyway. The reason that Representative Presley and, other Democrats and people on the left are willing to speak so confidently about this without any regard to Kavanaugh whatsoever, without any regard to the truth. It's not just for political reasons. Yes, I do think that they probably believe that he's too conservative. He's too much of a constitutionalist. They're afraid of the future of abortion. Oh, no. But I also think there's a grander narrative going on here. And that is the grander narrative of social justice. That's

the grander narrative of intersectionality, which is the fuel of modern day social justice. intersectionality, as we've talked about many times on this podcast, is the oppressed versus the oppressor. Because Kavanaugh is generally conservative, because he is a straight white Catholic male, because he comes from a well-to-do family with an Ivy League education, he is automatically assumed to be in the runk because he lacks oppression points. That's what intersectionality is built on. It describes oppression points to certain people based on their skin color, religion, et cetera. You know how I know this? because the title of this article, this botched article in the New York Times, was this. Brett Kavanaugh fitted in with the privileged kids.

She did not. So this is no longer about the premise of this. The central point of this article is no longer about whether or not he's a sexual assaulter, whether or not we have an alleged or accused or credible rapist on the Supreme Court. It's about the fact that he was privileged. And apparently, this supposed victim was not. It's about Kavanaugh being on the side of the, oppressor. He embodies so much, it seems like, of what the left hates. He is the archetype of the

oppressor because of his skin color, because of his socioeconomic status, because of his religion. None of these things, his race or his wealth or his faith or anything like that would matter if he was a hardcore leftist. It would be totally fine if he was worth millions of dollars, if he was, you know, a privileged white guy as long as he was on the left. But because he's Catholic and because he leans conservative, it is all a huge problem. Being liberal automatically gives you favorable ratings on the intersectionality scale. And this is the, of course, inherent injustice of intersectionality. So rather than looking at facts, rather than seeing people as individuals, it sees people's members of collections and ascribes credibility to them based on how oppressed they are or how

liberal they are. Intersectionality is the fuel, as we've already said, of the social justice movement, which is why, as I've said so many times, social justice is not justice. It's not justice. It is what Thomas Sol calls cosmic justice. It is this arbitrary equation of trying to push some people back that are more privileged than others, trying to push people forward that are less privileged in others until you have this completely equitable and equal utopia that just doesn't exist. So in the case of Kavanaugh and Ford, for example, you've got two pretty privileged, white, well-educated people, but for it as a woman. So in their eyes, she has more oppression points than he does, so we have to believe her.

This is how this all works. This is the lens through which much of the modern left sees the world and sees every issue, every case, every conflict. And when you realize, when you realize that, you understand why they report and why they react the way that they do. Covington Catholic boys with the Native American man, Nathan Phillips. That happened, I think it was, I think it was January, because there was, March for Life. It was immediately reported by leftist news outlets that these kids wearing

MAGA hats were harassing and intimidating them, and that wasn't the case at all. Nathan Phillips was actually the one who approached them, and the black Hebrew nationalists surrounding them were the one throwing out racial and homophobic slurs. A same with Jesse Smollett. He was believed immediately. Corey Booker passed an anti-lynching bill because of his story. Kamala Harris, of course, expressed outrage. But it wasn't true. We just believed him because he was a gay black man who of course was attacked by two white dudes wearing maga hats and a polar vortex in the middle of the night in chicago of course that has to be true why because of intersectionality but it turned out to be a giant hoax this is also why ilhan omar and rashita talib

get away with being anti-semitic on the intersectionality scale muslims are more oppressed than jews so it's okay to hang out with literal islamic terrorists and retweet anti-semitic cartoon artists and make anti-Semitic jokes, it's fine because they are Muslim, women of color, and if you criticize them for anything they do, then you are accused of inciting violence against them. Apparently, it's not fair game at all. So intersectional, social justice is the larger story

and the larger narrative behind the character assassination of Brett Kavanaugh. It's not just political. It's not just about Roe v. Wade or abortion. This is the same guy that Ruth Bader Ginsburg has praised, has said, is a very worthy colleague. Like I said before, I don't believe that this is a sustainable system for anyone, right or laugh, no matter what your race or your background is. I don't want anyone, regardless of their political affiliation, regardless of their faith, regardless of their nationality to be ruined by unproven allegations. I just don't think that's fair.

I don't want that for you. No matter how much you want that for me, I don't want that for you. And as Christians, we should always be on the side of justice and truth. In the case of Kavanaugh, God may only know the full story. story. We may never completely know 100% what happened 30 years ago, but as believers in objective truth, as believers in fairness and justice, we should side, not based on, we should pick our side, not based on emotion on political association or the intersectionality scale, but on what facts we know. And we also have to view people as individuals, not part of a collection or part

of an oppression group. We discern as much as we can based on the information that we have, And while we will never fully be able to exonerate someone, or at least in this case, we won't be able to exonerate someone just because we don't know for sure. We weren't there. We also can't accuse someone of being guilty without knowing what is actually true. Right and left Christians should oppose the lack of integrity demonstrated by the New York Times. We should be lovers of truth and trustworthiness. This would be the same whether it was Fox News as well.

It doesn't matter if it's the New York Times. We should be lovers and adheres to truth. The biblical worldview should always seek to know as much as we can about what is true. That's another problem with the secular view of justice, social or cosmic justice, is that it doesn't know what to do with truth. It doesn't know what to do with right and wrong. As we've already said, it's subjective and it's arbitrary. And so it doesn't know how to deal with true evil.

It comes up with its own idea for evil, which again is based on these very superficial qualifications of your skin color and your background. Oh, you're more privileged. And so you must be oppressing this person or you must be guilty. You must be on the side that is wrong. And that's the problem with moral relativism. That's the problem when you don't believe that God is the supreme moral lawgiver. You don't believe that God is the supreme arbiter of what is right and wrong.

You're left to your own devices to figure out what is true and what is not and what is just and what is not. That's why we get in all of these conflicts. And that is why the best that the world can come up with when it comes to a system of justice is intersectionality. and what we find is that intersectionality is always tripping over itself. It is always conflicting. It's always disagreeing with its own ideology. It can't keep up with itself. And that's what we see not just in this, but in every story that we listed before.

It's just not a sustainable system of justice. And Christians should be okay with that. We should be happy with that because the system of justice that God sets up, one that punishes people individually based on their own. own crimes, not on the crimes of generations before them or generations of the groups they're a part of, not the crimes of people who share their skin color, one that is based on truth, one that is based on fact, one that is equitable, that it doesn't favor the rich, it also doesn't favor the poor, one that is unbiased, why we should be okay, we should rejoice in the fact that God is set

up a kind of justice, a kind of idea of justice that we can follow is because it deals so much better with wrong and with evil and with vengeance than worldly systems ever could. I know we hear so often separation of church and state. America was not founded on Christian values. Well, that's not true. My friend Jeff Durbin says separation of church and state is not the same thing as separation between God and law. And that's absolutely true. If God is the supreme moral lawgiver, as C.S. Lewis talks about in mere Christianity, then there's just no coming up with truth are coming up with a real dichotomy of right and wrong without him. We can't exclude him when it comes to coming up with justice.

And that is why it is not okay for Christians to latch on to this kind of social justice that's fueled by intersectionality that is completely unbiblical. It is the secular effort to try to come up with right and wrong while still perpetrating and propagating moral relativism. We've talked about before the problem with that, the inherent problem with that, if you didn't already hear the paradox in it, is that moral relativism saying that whatever is right for this person is right for this person, whatever is right for that person, whatever is right for that person, the problem with it is that that in and of itself is an absolute truth. That is an absolute morality

because you're saying anyone else who isn't morally relative, anyone else who believes that moral relativism is wrong or morality is actually universal, you're saying that they're wrong. But if morality is really relative, how can you say that that person is wrong and your person is right? So it doesn't work. And intersectionality strangely kind of falls under this world of moral relativism. That's because when we believe that we're the only people that come up with our own truth and our own idea of what is just and what is not, we constantly find ourselves, we constantly find ourselves in a state of contradiction. We constantly find ourselves in a state of hypocrisy. And that's what we continually see on the left when it comes to assigning and ascribing guilt.

There was a story, and this is totally different, it just came to my mind. There was a story that I read of a Honduran native. He was in Maryland. He raped a six-year-old girl. He told the six-year-old girl, if you tell anyone, then I will ground you for 100 days. Thankfully, he faces 155 years in prison. That's great. Obviously, he shouldn't have been here in the first place he was in a legal immigrant.

The crime wouldn't have happened if he hadn't been here. here. But the thing that comforts me, and I think it does tie into all of this when we're talking about what justice actually is based on truth, what comforts me when I read horrific stories like that that just scare me, make my skin crawl, make me want to punch this guy in the face. The thing that comforts me is that God is the God of justice and that he knows so much better to deal with truth, to deal with right, to deal with wrong than we do. He has a much better way of exacting vengeance and repaying wrong than we do. The moral of the story is the secular world doesn't know how to deal with right and wrong.

They don't know how to deal with justice. They don't know how to deal with truth. They constantly want to separate what is actually true from what they feel to be true. And that's what happens when you create a world of moral relativism. Moral relativism doesn't work. It's just not a sustainable worldview. Yet if you talk to most people on the left, they would say morality is true for you. it's true for me, whatever you want it to be, your truth, my truth, it's completely subjective,

it's not universal at all. And yet, at the same time, if you don't believe that morality is relative, or if you don't believe in their version of morality, if you don't ascribe to intersectionality, for example, or you don't hop on to their social justice causes, well, they call you a bigot. They call you wrong. They call you on the wrong side of history. They call you evil Nazi, whatever. So even the people that are perpetrating this idea of moral relativism, we see, especially in this whole Kavanaugh thing, the outrage that they have is that they don't actually believe that morality is relative. They actually believe, if you don't believe in their view of morality, then you are condemned to their own version of at least a proverbial kind of hell. And that just

shows us that the outside world that doesn't believe that God is the supreme moral lawgiver, that he is the transcendent moral lawgiver, that he is the one that says what is right and wrong. They are constantly tripping over themselves. They are constantly confused. They are constantly in conflict. Intersectionality just is not a sustainable system of justice. A political vengeance is not a sustainable system of justice. Deciding that someone is wrong because they're conservative or deciding that someone is wrong because of the color of their skin, whether you're white or black or Asian, whatever it is, is not a sustainable system of justice. And it's not one that glorifies God, no matter who is in the hot seat. So that's what Christians need to take away from this. And we need

to find comfort in the fact that God and his idea of right and wrong that is based on truth that is for the individual, not blaming entire people based on whatever group oppression groups they're a part of, whether they are the world's version of a victim or an oppressor or not. God's justice that is based on truth, that is individual, that shows no partiality to the rich, that shows no partiality to the poor, that is unbiased, that is equitable, that is equal, we should find comfort in the fact that we don't have to be confused. Like we don't have to be cut up in this secular social justice craziness that doesn't know up from down or right from wrong. These people who espouse moral relativism

and yet assert that if you don't believe the way that they do, that you're absolutely wrong. They're confused. But we don't have to be confused. We have a God who knows good versus evil, even when we don't, who knows right and wrong, even when we don't. So our responsibility as Christians is just to go in the direction of where we see truth. Again, that doesn't mean that we, uplift the side that agrees with us as perfect and as holy and as can never do anything wrong. It doesn't mean that we demonize our political enemies as people who can always and never do anything right and always do something wrong. It means that we are on the side of truth.

And when reporters or when whoever lack integrity, when they lie, that should bother us. That should bother us as image bearers of God, a God who loves truth. truth. So I am very thankful to have a God of justice. I'm very thankful that as image bears of Christ, that we can love justice, that we can love truth. That doesn't mean that we're going to be perfect. That doesn't mean that we know everything. Of course, we are going to slip and fall. We're going to be on the wrong side of things sometimes. But the fact of the matter is, is that one day, we won't have any questions about this. We won't have any confusion. We won't have any chaos. We won't have any conflict. We won't have to worry about these stupid political stories anymore because,

Jesus will rule in perfect peace. And that's the thing that we have to look forward to. Until then, it is our responsibility to seek truth and to be on the side of truth, at least as much as we possibly can. And not to demonize those who disagree with us. I think that Christians in good faith can disagree on the Kavanaugh thing. But of course, we need to be careful why we're taking the stance that we are and what the reasoning is behind our viewpoint on that.

So that is all that I have today. Thank you guys so much for listening. If you have any questions, please email me. Alley at the conservative millennial blog.com. If you don't already subscribe on YouTube, go ahead and do that. If you are on YouTube, you can listen to me. You can listen to me on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Omni.fn. There are a bunch of different places that you can listen.

I will see you guys back here on Friday with the vaccine conversation part two. Hey, this is Steve Deast. If you're listening to Allie, you already understand that the biggest issues facing our country aren't just political. They're moral, spiritual, and rooted in what we believe is true about God. God, humanity, and reality itself. On the Steve Day show, we take the news of the day and tested against first principles, faith, truth, and objective reality.

We don't just chase narratives and we don't offer false comfort. We ask the hard questions and follow the answers wherever they leave, even when it's unpopular. This is a show for people who want honesty over hype and clarity over chaos. If you're looking for commentary grounded in conviction and unwilling to lie to you about where we are or where we're headed, you can watch the Steve Day show right here on Blaze TV or listen wherever you get podcasts. I hope you'll join us. Thank you.