an online lynch mob has morphed into a Democrat talking point and now a malicious prosecution in New York. New York Governor Kathy Hochul is taking the Cornell case away from the local district attorney and handing it to a familiar face to determine whether anyone should face criminal charges. You just heard it mentioned there to President Trump. Now taking center stage New York Attorney General Letitia James. In what world would the police learn from a victim that she'd been literally gang raped while intoxicated by five men in a fraternity house and not elevate those allegations to the district attorney. I'm invoking the power conferred to me as the governor of the state of New York to enlist Attorney General James as an independent special prosecutor in this case. She'll follow the facts. She'll examine the evidence and go wherever it leads. Follow the facts, examine the evidence. That's the job. Can she do the job? Will she do the job? Can she be fair? Here's how James described as a reminder the Trump administration just a few years back. Stand up to the federal government. We've got to stand up to bullies. We've got to stand up to an administration which is two male, two pale, and two stale. Two male, two pale, two stale. Now this time facts matter. Details matter. Slogans would not, should not get the job done. So here's how she's framing her role as prosecutor. We will review the facts, gather evidence, interview witnesses, and if warranted, pursue prosecutions. I know that you want answers. I do too. This is now an active criminal investigation led by the office of the Attorney General. Sounds absolutely serious and prosecutorial. Doesn't sound sloganeering like two male, two pale, two stale. But just days before her appointment, we saw that old familiar voice. Here was Latisha James on social media. What this young woman has been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. I'm holding her in my heart and my prayers to her and to all survivors. You're not alone. We stand with you. It doesn't appear to be a prosecutor neutral to the facts, ready to examine the evidence. And because of that, she and the governor on that were pressed today. Why did you affirm her allegations as fact without doing your own fact finding investigation into the governor? Why did you appoint an official who made a public statement affirming those allegations as fact as someone who's supposed to be doing an investigation? I will answer that. I have every confidence in our Attorney General to do what she has always done. Look at the facts, examine the record, and draw the proper conclusions. That's exactly what's going to happen in this case. I will not comment on a Facebook post. I will not comment on a Facebook post. The presumption there is some anonymous poster on Facebook doesn't dignify the response of the Attorney General, but it's her post on Facebook that demands answers. Also demanding answers is the litany of politicians lining up Democrats to stake a claim on the so-called Cornell seven Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed. He put out a statement taking the word of Jane Doe, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, she not only took the word of Jane Doe, she made up words and facts for Jane Doe. Seven men drugged and gang-raped a 20 year old woman. They lured her in to a fraternity house. They drugged her with ketamine. They then posted to a group chat that she was incapacitated, and seven men took turns gang-raping her for seven hours. Seven men took turns gang-raping her. They lured her to a fraternity house. They drugged her, and again seven men took turns gang-raping her. That's not even in the civil complaint alleged by Jane Doe. Yes, seven men are named in the lawsuit, but Jane Doe doesn't out alleged that seven men gang-raped her. What each man did is alleged to be different, some doing absolutely nothing. She doesn't allege they took turns raping her. She doesn't allege she was lured to the fraternity house. She doesn't allege that she was involuntarily drugged. That's pure defamation, and the only thing saving Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the pin she wears on her lapel that she sits in Congress, because we all know if congressional representatives were held to the truth, our jails would be full of politicians. The men themselves though have now given their account of the night. The New York Times has obtained documents from Cornell's Title IX investigation. Here's what they say. One said that he in fact was the victim of sexual misconduct because the woman had given him oral sex when he was too incapacitated to consent. Another saying he snorted a line of ketamine off her body and she then tried to initiate sex. And yet another said he asked Jane Doe for consent before engaging and gave her a chance to stop. Here's the quote. You recall telling Jane Doe that if you're uncomfortable with any of this or you won't want to do this, that's perfectly fine. We can call it a night. To that, he says Jane Doe replied, "We're all consenting adults here." Another male says, "I remember the girl in specific saying something along the lines of this was normal in medieval times." This was normal in medieval times. Jane Doe is telling a story, a very different story than what you just heard from the men. A transcript of her interview with campus police that came out when that happened in the weeks that followed that event says that she relayed with 100% confidence that she was raped. Of course, that's in contradiction to the statement she gave under the penalty of perjury to the prosecutor or to the police that she edited over 20 times. Leaving you with a question, what and who do you trust? Which version of Jane Doe? In the law when you are confronted with a witness, a witness with contradictory statements, that witness is impeached on the stand. They are often deemed uncredible. And what you're left with is turned to evidence outside the words, the contradictory words of the accuser. In this case, you have the text messages, you have the testimony of friends and roommates, you have the sorority big sister, all of which do undercut the testimony of Jane Doe. And then there's the law. Back to Governor Kathy Hoku. She says the law is at fault in New York. She describes it as a loophole that when someone voluntarily becomes intoxicated, that person can retain the capability of consent. She wants it changed. If someone is too intoxicated to consent, it should not matter whether they chose to use drugs or alcohol. Voluntary intoxication is not a license for sexual assault or gang rape, period. I support closing this loophole and will work with the New York State Legislature to accomplish this. Suggesting is a loophole that two people, consenting adults who get intoxicated, can't then have consensual sex, suggests be careful this weekend. Anyone who would have a drink is incapable of consent. You could all be guilty if this law were changed this weekend in New York.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.
Post from Truth Social
Video transcript 8:28
an online lynch mob has morphed into a Democrat talking point and now a malicious prosecution in New York. New York Governor Kathy Hochul is taking the Cornell case away from the local district attorney and handing it to a familiar face to determine whether anyone should face criminal charges. You just heard it mentioned there to President Trump. Now taking center stage New York Attorney General Letitia James. In what world would the police learn from a victim that she'd been literally gang raped while intoxicated by five men in a fraternity house and not elevate those allegations to the district attorney. I'm invoking the power conferred to me as the governor of the state of New York to enlist Attorney General James as an independent special prosecutor in this case. She'll follow the facts. She'll examine the evidence and go wherever it leads. Follow the facts, examine the evidence. That's the job. Can she do the job? Will she do the job? Can she be fair? Here's how James described as a reminder the Trump administration just a few years back. Stand up to the federal government. We've got to stand up to bullies. We've got to stand up to an administration which is two male, two pale, and two stale. Two male, two pale, two stale. Now this time facts matter. Details matter. Slogans would not, should not get the job done. So here's how she's framing her role as prosecutor. We will review the facts, gather evidence, interview witnesses, and if warranted, pursue prosecutions. I know that you want answers. I do too. This is now an active criminal investigation led by the office of the Attorney General. Sounds absolutely serious and prosecutorial. Doesn't sound sloganeering like two male, two pale, two stale. But just days before her appointment, we saw that old familiar voice. Here was Latisha James on social media. What this young woman has been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. I'm holding her in my heart and my prayers to her and to all survivors. You're not alone. We stand with you. It doesn't appear to be a prosecutor neutral to the facts, ready to examine the evidence. And because of that, she and the governor on that were pressed today. Why did you affirm her allegations as fact without doing your own fact finding investigation into the governor? Why did you appoint an official who made a public statement affirming those allegations as fact as someone who's supposed to be doing an investigation? I will answer that. I have every confidence in our Attorney General to do what she has always done. Look at the facts, examine the record, and draw the proper conclusions. That's exactly what's going to happen in this case. I will not comment on a Facebook post. I will not comment on a Facebook post. The presumption there is some anonymous poster on Facebook doesn't dignify the response of the Attorney General, but it's her post on Facebook that demands answers. Also demanding answers is the litany of politicians lining up Democrats to stake a claim on the so-called Cornell seven Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed. He put out a statement taking the word of Jane Doe, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, she not only took the word of Jane Doe, she made up words and facts for Jane Doe. Seven men drugged and gang-raped a 20 year old woman. They lured her in to a fraternity house. They drugged her with ketamine. They then posted to a group chat that she was incapacitated, and seven men took turns gang-raping her for seven hours. Seven men took turns gang-raping her. They lured her to a fraternity house. They drugged her, and again seven men took turns gang-raping her. That's not even in the civil complaint alleged by Jane Doe. Yes, seven men are named in the lawsuit, but Jane Doe doesn't out alleged that seven men gang-raped her. What each man did is alleged to be different, some doing absolutely nothing. She doesn't allege they took turns raping her. She doesn't allege she was lured to the fraternity house. She doesn't allege that she was involuntarily drugged. That's pure defamation, and the only thing saving Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the pin she wears on her lapel that she sits in Congress, because we all know if congressional representatives were held to the truth, our jails would be full of politicians. The men themselves though have now given their account of the night. The New York Times has obtained documents from Cornell's Title IX investigation. Here's what they say. One said that he in fact was the victim of sexual misconduct because the woman had given him oral sex when he was too incapacitated to consent. Another saying he snorted a line of ketamine off her body and she then tried to initiate sex. And yet another said he asked Jane Doe for consent before engaging and gave her a chance to stop. Here's the quote. You recall telling Jane Doe that if you're uncomfortable with any of this or you won't want to do this, that's perfectly fine. We can call it a night. To that, he says Jane Doe replied, "We're all consenting adults here." Another male says, "I remember the girl in specific saying something along the lines of this was normal in medieval times." This was normal in medieval times. Jane Doe is telling a story, a very different story than what you just heard from the men. A transcript of her interview with campus police that came out when that happened in the weeks that followed that event says that she relayed with 100% confidence that she was raped. Of course, that's in contradiction to the statement she gave under the penalty of perjury to the prosecutor or to the police that she edited over 20 times. Leaving you with a question, what and who do you trust? Which version of Jane Doe? In the law when you are confronted with a witness, a witness with contradictory statements, that witness is impeached on the stand. They are often deemed uncredible. And what you're left with is turned to evidence outside the words, the contradictory words of the accuser. In this case, you have the text messages, you have the testimony of friends and roommates, you have the sorority big sister, all of which do undercut the testimony of Jane Doe. And then there's the law. Back to Governor Kathy Hoku. She says the law is at fault in New York. She describes it as a loophole that when someone voluntarily becomes intoxicated, that person can retain the capability of consent. She wants it changed. If someone is too intoxicated to consent, it should not matter whether they chose to use drugs or alcohol. Voluntary intoxication is not a license for sexual assault or gang rape, period. I support closing this loophole and will work with the New York State Legislature to accomplish this. Suggesting is a loophole that two people, consenting adults who get intoxicated, can't then have consensual sex, suggests be careful this weekend. Anyone who would have a drink is incapable of consent. You could all be guilty if this law were changed this weekend in New York.
Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.