It's Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing Day for Christine Blazy Ford, one of Brett Kavanaugh's

accusers, and Brett Kavanaugh will testify as well. So that's all that matters today. I'm Ben Shapiro. This is

the Ben Shapiro show. Oh yes, we will go wall to wall with all of the latest. Suffice it to say,

this is not going well for Republicans. I will explain

why, for all of the reasons, it is not going well. Also, what the actual hearings should have been designed to do and what they actually were not designed to do. We'll get to all of that in just one second. First, if it feels like you need to drink, you're not alone. Okay, the reality is that on a day like this, pretty much all of us, especially in this business, need a drink.

And if you actually would like a drink of something good,

then you should go out and check out our friends over at Wink. Wink makes it easy to discover great wines. Well, we've taken a little bit of time to wring ourselves out from the new year. And if you want to, you know, go back to drinking. Now's the time to do it. Go check it out with Wink. Wink's wine experts select wines matched your taste personalized for you shipped right to your starting just 13 bucks a bottle. There's nothing like coming home to a bottle of delicious wink wine selected just for you. They have this thing called the palette profile quiz and they ask you simple questions like do you like blueberries or how do you take your coffee? And then they give you wine recommendations based on that. Folks around the offices have had taste tests of the wine and they love it. I mean, so much so that they are not usable the rest of the day after these

taste tests. the wine and they love it. I mean, so much so that they are not usable the rest of the day after these taste tests. But you can go check out wink.com right now. It's try wink.com slash ben. T-R-Y-W-I-N-C-com slash Ben. And when you use that slash ben, you get $20 off your first shipment, which is a pretty solid deal. Try wink.com slash Ben.

Wink sends wines curated to your taste.

Each month, there are new delicious wines. There's no membership fees. You can skip any month. You can cancel any time, and shipping is covered. So pretty solid deal. Go check it out right now. Try wink.com slash Ben for $20 off. Okay. Well, today is, of course, the big hearing day. And today is the day in which the Senate Judiciary Committee, after at long last interviewed Christine Blaisey Ford, who is the first accuser against Brett Kavanaugh. Now, to stop for just a second before we actually get into the accusations that Christine Blaisey Ford made, we should recognize that there have been a number of allegations that had been made. And I want to go through them. This is the one that matters. Christine Blaisey Ford's is the one that matters because it is the most credible. And it's the most credible because it is the one that rings the truest. There are still questions about it. And this is the problem for Republicans. From the very outset, it was unclear what Republicans were attempting to argue about these allegations. Were they arguing that Christine Blaise Ford was lying? I for one never argued that Christine Blazey Ford was lying.

I always believed that she sort of believed what she believed. She'd come forward with these

allegations before Brett Kavanaugh was even selected for the Supreme Court when he was just on

the short list. And there's evidence that she had talked about it back in 2012. I was never

somebody who suggested that Christine Blaise Ford was lying. I questioned whether her memories might not have

been correct, because memories change over 30 years. I questioned whether, more importantly,

the evidence was sufficient to knock Brett Kavanaugh out, and this was always the big question.

The big question to me was, is an allegation alone,

no matter how credible without any corroborating evidence whatsoever, is that enough to stop a

nomination? That's really the question, because no matter how credible a witness is, it's going

to be he said, she said, if they're the only people in the room. And in this particular case,

Christine Blaise Ford had suggested there were other people at a party when she was 15 and Brett Kavanaugh was 17. She says that at that party, Kavanaugh and his friend, Mark Judge, forced her into a room, turned up the music, and Kavanaugh forced her onto a bed where he attempted to take off her clothes and then placed his hand over her mouth when she tried to scream. There's no other witness that has verified this count. Mark Judge has denied it. I think he should be subpoenaed, but Mark Judge denied it. Frank Kavanaugh denied it.

She says there were other people at the party. We'll get into her specific allegations in a moment, including one of her close friends who has denied that she was at any party with Brett Kavanaugh. So there is no corroborating evidence. We don't know date. We don't know location. We don't know time. We don't know how she got there. So even if she's telling the absolute truth, there is no way to actually corroborate any of her story. The reason that matters is because this was happening in a quasi-public setting. There should be some corroborating detail. If you look at situations involving Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein, there are ways that you can corroborate at least that people were telling the story at the time. As I've mentioned on the show, when I was in high school, I've said 15, but I believe I was actually 13 or 14 because it was my sophomore year of high school. When I was in high school, I was abused by some kids in my class. I remember where it was. I remember who the kids were, and I should be able to lock down the date if I just look at a yearbook or look back at a calendar. And I can find people to corroborate the story. There's no corroborating evidence here. And Blaise Ford has been unable to really corroborate any of that. Now, does that mean she's lying? No, it doesn't mean she's lying. it doesn't mean she's lying at all. And so what this comes down to is, is the allegation itself enough?

...