Tucker Carlson: Answering this question should have been simple for Ketanji Brown Jackson

In the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee asked Joe Biden's Supreme Court nominee, Ketanji Jackson, what should have been the easiest question ever posed. Can you define what a woman is? Now imagine. Put yourself in her position and imagine how relieved Jackson must have been when she heard that question. Here, she stayed up all night trying to memorize obscure case law from 19th century and court precedent and when she finally gets to the hearing room, all the Republicans want is a recap of day one of ninth grade biology. What's a woman?  

For a world-famous scholar like Ketanji Jackson, that should have been effortless. Talk about slow and steady right down the plate. "A woman," Jackson might have said, looking incredulous, "That's simple. A woman is a human being with two X chromosomes. Ask any geneticist. It's detectable in a blood test, but if you're still confused by what a woman is, you can ask a doctor. Women have wider pelvises and different bone structures from men, not to mention very different genitalia. It's usually pretty obvious that women, just by looking at them, women are built differently because their bodies are designed to do different things. Nature is real. Women, menstruate. Women give birth and then breastfeed. Men do not do these things because they can't. Not a single man in all human history has ever had his period or delivered a baby and I know this, senator, because I'm a woman myself. In fact, that's why I'm here. Joe Biden nominated me to the Supreme Court because I am female, and he has said so himself many times. The president knows exactly what a woman is. If he didn't know, he wouldn't have picked me, obviously. So please, Senator Blackburn, do not waste my time. With all respect, that is an incredibly stupid question."  

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON, BIDEN’S SUPREME COURT PICK, REFUSES TO DEFINE THE WORD ‘WOMAN’ 

Imagine if she said that, what an answer that would have been. Do you know a single person wouldn't have cheered? We would have. Honesty is a wonderful thing to watch, no matter where it comes from, but that is not what Ketanji Jackson said. Here was her actual answer:  

MARSHA BLACKBURN: Can you provide a definition for the word "woman"?  

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON: Can I provide a definition? No. 

MARSHA BLACKBURN: Yeah.  

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON: I can't.  

MARSHA BLACKBURN: You can't?  

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON: Not in this context. I'm not a biologist. 

"Oh, I'm not a biologist." You following this? So, only a biologist is allowed to tell you what a woman is and Ketanji Jackson, incredibly impressive as they tell us she is, is not, she just reminded us, a biologist. Not that would make any difference if she were a biologist because no one the Democratic Party cares what biologists think about biological sex. Biologists have been banned along with a lady who writes Harry Potter novels.  

In 2022, the power of science and literature crumble in the face of the trans lobby. So, actually, Ketanji Jackson's academic credentials are not, strictly speaking, all that relevant here, but still pause for a second and marinate in the awe-inspiring stupidity of her answer. "What's a woman? I don't know. I'm not a biologist." Oh, we see how this works.  

BONGINO: KETANJI BROWN JACKSON DISQUALIFIED HERSELF WITH THIS SINGLE CLAIM 

Hey, Ketanji Jackson, is it raining? I don't know. I'm not a meteorologist.  

How would you respond to someone who said something like that? You'd probably give up and find someone else to talk to. That person was not capable of conversation. So, last night we said we wanted to see Ketanji Jackson's LSAT scores. That's no longer necessary. We can say with certainty she is clearly a sub genius and probably shouldn't be on the Supreme Court. What's a woman? Definitely the most revealing question ever asked in a Senate confirmation hearing and one of the many things it reveals is how utterly the Democratic Party as an institution has changed in just four years. 

It's a mile marker that tells us the evolution of the party. So, during the last Supreme Court nomination, you'll remember, we were commanded to believe that all women must be believed regardless of whether or not they were telling the truth. They're women, therefore in the name of social justice, you must accept whatever they say at face value. A woman's word is like a sworn affidavit. You can take it to the bank. Here's Kamala Harris to explain:  

KAMALA HARRIS:  Let's speak truth about what we've all been talking about the last few days and again this evening, which is that Supreme Court process. Let's speak the truth. It was a sham and a disgrace. Let's speak the truth that it was a denial of justice for the women of this country.  

How amusing is it to see Kamala Harris say, "let's speak the truth." Throw a beer can at the TV if you agree. So, to recap, in 2019, it was "a sham and a disgrace" to doubt a woman's word because, by the virtue of their biology, women did not lie. That's what it was to be a woman—utterly truthful all the time. Joe Biden agreed with this. Women were very different from men inherently. He told us so and that's why you weren't allowed to hit them. 

JOE BIDEN: We, in fact, have to fundamentally change the culture, the culture of how women are treated. No man has a right to raise a hand to a woman in anger other than in self-defense, and that rarely ever occurs, and so we have to just change the culture, period, and keep punching at it and punching at it and punching it.  

DURBIN HOLDS OUT HOPE FOR GOP SUPPORT TO CONFIRM JUDGE JACKSON, GRAHAM SAYS ‘STAY TUNED’ 

All right, so we mocked him. "Keep punching at it." Domestic abuse it is. We made fun of him, but he was on to something. Actually, what he said was entirely true. Ask yourself: Two men get in a bar fight, one of them punches the other in the face. What's your response to that? "Come on, guys. Take it outside." A man and a woman get in a bar fight. The man punches the woman in the face. What's your response to that? Well, if you're a normal human being, you're horrified. Punching a woman in the face is not just a felony—though it is—it is a moral crime. Decent people don't punch women in the face, period. A man's best instinct is to protect women. That's nothing to be ashamed of. It makes a civilization civilized. That's why we don't send expectant mothers into battle. Got that, you degraded freaks?  

Pregnant flight suits are an attempt to make us deny our most basic instinct, an instinct that we should not be ashamed of. Joe Biden had this instinct. He noted it. He was absolutely right. Why was he right? Because men and women are not the same. We're not saying one is morally better than the other. They're morally equal, but they're different on the deepest levels, beginning with biology. Every person on Earth knows this is true. We are born knowing it, but now they're commanding you to pretend otherwise, to deny nature and suppress your most basic and valuable instincts.  

They're telling you, you have no right to be more upset when a woman is injured or a woman gets her ear bitten off in a bar fight than when a man does. Are you ready to suppress those instincts? Are you ready to live in a society that won't acknowledge them? What happens to our justice system if we pretend men and women are exactly the same or don't exist? Ketanji Jackson's claim that we can't say who's a man who's a woman will transform the way we administer justice, starting with our vast regime of anti-discrimination law.  

If we can't say for certain who's a woman, how are we going to enforce Joe Biden's famous Violence Against Women Act? Why do we have such an act? Who would care? How can we set aside a huge percentage of federal contracts for women-owned companies if we don't know what a woman is? Oh, I guess that scam is going to have to end tomorrow because it no longer makes any sense and, by the way, how is sexism even a meaningful category in a world in which sex has no meaning? Well, it's not. Why have Title IX, which bans sex discrimination in schools? If we don't have biological sex, how can we have discrimination on the basis of biological sex? Thinking this through?  

The Trump administration thought it through. Actually, they saw this coming. We should tell you that. The Trump White House tried to preserve Title IX by arguing that the concept of sex as defined in that law derives from biology, not from how you're feeling about your personal identity on any particular day. That's the case they made. In response to that, they were denounced right-wing lunatics. The ACLU declared that, "The Trump administration is trying to erase trans people." 

Really? Maybe it was bigger than that. Now, the Biden administration is in charge of everything, and in less than a year, the worst, most fervent predictions have come entirely true. Female athletes are losing NCAA championships to men dressing up as women in order to cheat their way to victory. Every person in America sees this happening. Very few are brave enough to say a word about it, but here's one of them. This is a woman who happened to be watching an NCAA swimming championship in which a male swimmer going by the name of Lia Thomas dominated every woman in the pool:  

OUTRAGE AFTER KETANJI BROWN JACKSON SAYS SHE ‘CAN’T’ DEFINE THE WORD WOMAN:’LEGIT BIZARRE’ 

WOMAN:  I'm a woman. That is not a woman.  

MAN: Can I ask you a question?  

WOMAN: That is not a woman.  

MAN:  Can I ask you a question?  

WOMAN: Do you have ovaries?  

MAN: Can I ask you a question?  

WOMAN: Ask me a question.  

MAN: Are you a biologist?  

WOMAN: Oh, my god. Don't be ridiculous. 

MAN: No, I'm serious.  

WOMAN: I'm not a vet, but I know what a dog is.  

We'd love to have her on. "I'm not a vet, but I know what a dog is." Yes, you do. We all do. Even Ketanji Jackson knows she's had a few children of her own. She probably learned exactly how the process works. The point of the trans movement isn't to convince anyone that biology isn't real. They're not even trying. That's an impossible case to make. You would sound ridiculous if you tried to articulate that, much less explain it.  

The point of this exercise is very different. The point is to make the rest of us repeat a lie, to say something we know perfectly well is not true. "Yes, Lia Thomas is a proud, beautiful woman who won the swim meet because she practiced harder than the other girls. Lia Thomas deserved to win. Her victory wasn't cheating and no, I don't notice her bulging swimsuit. I have no idea what you're talking about." That's what they demand you say, not because they care about Lia Thomas or any other trans person. They couldn't care less. Making you pretend to believe something you don't, that's the point, because if they can make you pretend to believe something you know is untrue, they've won. They control your brain.  

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON, BIDEN’S SUPREME COURT PICK, REVEALS A LOT WITH QUESTIONS SHE WON’T ANSWER 

So, this isn't about trans people. It's about all of us and the stakes are very high and that's why the censorship is so intense. Have you noticed? Our national conversation about transgenderism is completely defined by censorship, by making you shut up, not allowing you to notice the obvious is why they're doing it. There's no attempt to persuade you. There's no fact-based argument. You can't respond, "Oh, so men can become women just by wishing it. So, tell us how that works. Can I stop male pattern baldness the same way? Can I grow six inches? Please explain how this remarkable new power the trans community has discovered might apply to me. Can I do it too?" 

The power of positive thinking! Well, that's a fair question. They'll never answer it. They'll just make you be quiet. Their first move always is censorship and their second move, inevitably, is punishment. We learn that again last night when we were suspended from Twitter. "We have determined that this account violated the Twitter rules specifically for violating our rules against hateful conduct," Twitter wrote to us. The only way out of Twitter jail was to delete our tweet, to pretend we never said it, to cleanse America's conscience by just whiting out the past.  

What was our crime, by the way? Well, we dared to highlight two accounts that Twitter has banned: Charlie Kirk and the Babylon bee. There was nothing hateful about either one. We'd say look them up, but you can't because they're gone now, but both merely noted that biological sex is fixed at birth. This has been universally acknowledged by those homo sapiens for at least 300,000 years. So, it was a factual statement, but on Twitter, as in our public life, truth is no defense.  

Twitter is now run by a man called Parag Agrawal, who has said plainly he does not believe in free speech. Agrawal came to this country as an adult to get a degree from Stanford. Now, Agrawal controls the single most important forum for America's political conversation. That is a big and important job. It's such a public company. It's much more than that. It's a kind of public trust that allows us democracy to function. So, you would think you'd want a guy like that, in a position like that, to have some respect for his adopted country's core institutions, beginning with and primarily the First Amendment, but Agrawal has no respect for First Amendment or our Constitution. He explained that openly in a 2020 speech. 

PARAG AGRAWAL: Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation. The kinds of things that we do to work about this is to focus less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed. One of the changes today that we see is speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak but our role, which is particularly emphasized, is who can be heard?  

Oh, so the new standard isn't your right as a citizen to say what you believe is true. The new standard is achieving something called healthy public conversation. By the way, this is not one man's opinion. You grew up in a country where people are free to say what they wanted, but now that political speech, in fact, all speech is disseminated to other citizens via social media, this is the guy who actually controls what you're allowed to think.  

NOT THE BEE CEO LOCKED OUT OF TWITTER FOLLOWING BABYLON BEE ACCOUNT LOCK 

So, what is healthy public conversation? What does that mean, exactly? We're interested, so we texted Parag Agrawal very first thing this morning and then we emailed his office and then him personally, all to find out. Agrawal was too cowardly to respond to us. So, we're going to have to assume that a healthy public conversation is whatever Parag Agrawal wants it to be. He decides the meaning.  

In other words, a single man who has total and undisguised contempt for America's most basic values gets to decide what Americans are allowed to talk about. Parag Agrawal doesn't think you should know about Hunter Biden's laptop. That's unhealthy. So, he censors the story. You don't get to see it. He doesn't think you should be allowed to discuss basic biology in public. We're erasing all science because it's unhealthy. So, now you're not allowed to talk about it. In fact, you're banned, silenced, censored. 

We can't control Parag Agrawal, but we can't ask: how do you feel about this new standard?  

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

Not so long ago, this was a free country. Now Parag Agrawal and nine other billionaires, whose names you might not even know, who certainly were not elected to anything, get to determine the limits of your conversations. Are we okay with this? What happened to all the Liberals and the self-described civil libertarians we used to have in America? They don't seem to be fighting the power anymore. They seem to have joined it.  

How about Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger and everyone else who's constantly lecturing the serfs about democracy? Is this the kind of democracy they're talking about? A democracy in which a tiny sliver of very rich people control everything, including your mind. Doesn't sound like democracy. It sounds suspiciously like oligarchy. Don't you think? They can let us know. All those people are welcome on that this show any time, including and very much including you, Parag Agrawal. We promise a healthy public conversation.  

This article is adapted from Tucker Caflson's opening commentary on the March 22, 2022 edition of "Tucker Carlson Tonight."