From the New York Times unlike over this is the conservatives have been deeply divided about how to respond to allegations of sexual assaults against Judge bread Cabinet? Why that's starting to change It's two September twenty Ross before these allegations emerged against him. Was there anything that essentially, all conservatives agreed on when it comes to the nomination of bread cabinet? They all agreed that he should be confirmed, I think, is the is the is the most reasonable way to put it Rostov. It is an opinion columnist for the times I mean conserving,

basically spent decades, winning presidential elections, appointing Supreme Court justices and then being really disappointed with how those justices rule, so conservatives basically spend a period. Starting in the seventies and eighties, trying to build a kind of intellectual project that was dissociated famously with the federalist society to ensure that republic administrations would sort of know what they were getting an cavenaugh? You know he's a federal society judge he's the guy who all of my conservative lawyer, friends in Washington, love from the beginning and said this is the guy we should nominate and so on. Okay. So what has happened since these allegations emerged within the conservative movement when it comes to breath Cavanaugh? Well, I would say that there are, at this point, roughly three camps. What do you make of the all this job,

Cavanaugh stuff, where tied him it's hard to know what to make of it and the first camp, which may now shows up in figures as diverse as the Republican Domini for Senate in North Dakota. These people were teenagers. One is supposed to the alleged incident took place, teenagers who evidently were drawn according to her own drunk. Even if something like this happened, it was in high school. It's not that big a deal. Maybe it was just horseplay, and you know there should be a statute of limitations for things that aren't actually rape and could be opened, a multiple interpretations and so forth. This is sort of you, no boys, being boys, high school records, shouldn't matter kind of perspective and that's pretty common. The difficulty that has run into is it is not actually the defence that breath Cavenaugh himself is making right. So this argument is sort of, on the one hand, pretty cultural

widespread among conservatives and not only conservatives. I've talked to a political people who basically take this view too, but it's a little bit irrelevant to the kind of defence Cavenaugh himself has mounted, but I'm stuck there while no centres are publicly saying like yeah. This is my camp. This is how I view things, maybe in part, because you said Cavanaugh himself is saying this there are centres who are saying that their mind is already made up before the hearings are even heard. I've just been honest unless there's something more or no I'm not gonna ruin judge cabinets life over this? For example, Lindsey Gram should have an aren't those senators effectively saying this isn't disqualifying behaviour, even if it's true maybe, but I think, some of those senators

are taking the view that you know. We already know from their perspective that this isn't gonna be resolved right, that there isn't going to be some smoking, Gunnar Dispositive Proof either way. What am I? supposed to do, go ahead and ruin this guy's lie based on an accusation. I don't know when it happened. I don't know where it happened, and everybody named in regard to be there said it didn't happen again. He's got may be wrong, but that may be the assumption that they're making and that, in that case there basically taking a sort of innocent until proven guilty perspective writing. There saying look, we're giving cabin on the presumption of innocence, and these allegations, you know, haven't been corroborated by any of the witnesses the woman would forward. So, therefore, it's not enough to deny the nomination. I think that would be the other line of argument they reduce. So from your perspective, a senator like Lindsey, Graham isn't speaking in code by saying this is

qualifying. That's not code, for I don't care about this he's saying in a mystic sense from what I've heard. I doubt the testimony will prove this beyond reasonable doubt I mean yeah. I dont want to speak definitively Ferland programme, but I think that if you had him on the show, he would say it's not that I don't take these kind of allegation seriously. I just think they have to meet a task that, for instance, the wives allegations met. These haven't met that test. Therefore, there are not enough to deny a person a high, First, when otherwise their reputation is startling. What's the second camp of concern is how else

Did we see those on the right divide up when doktor body for came forward, while the second camp is what you might call the sort of agnostic, uncertain and open minded Camp Judiciary Chairman Chap rashly offer and Ford above say of ways to tell her story either in an open station or told session or a public or a private interview? That's forgive her ways you can choose to come, and this is the official view of most of the leading GEO peace. Senators right. This is sort of chalk grasslands view officially it certainly Susan Collins stated view. Obviously, if judge cabin as lied about what happened, that would be disqualify Jeff flakes stated view and so on, which, as these are serious allegations, we need to hear them if they

Our true they're, probably disqualifying, certainly now that you know Cavenaugh has denied them if it can be showed that he's lying about that, then their disqualifying, but they are just one person's word against avenues, so we need to hear them both we need, their view, other witnesses hear what they have to say and then make a judgment so camp to is basically arguing. If true, this is probably disqualifying, but we need to figure out if it's true, so let's find out right and its people, who are, I think, open to multiple theories of what could have happened here. They are open to the possibility that Cavanaugh definitely did it their open to them stability- that this is some kind of mistake of memory and their open to the possibility that it's a fabrication and but they think that all of those options are plausible. Given the limited evidence that we have so far, not alone the phone and will in what he said, you were here.

It wasn't a depart, there's clearly somebody's mixed up? Russia? Where does the idea? of mistaken identity- that Christine Bossy Ford somehow is mistaken Miss remembering that it was bred Cavanaugh, you believe very well. I think she's mistaken ass, anxious, they concern. Where does that fit into this big camp? Number? Two that we're talking about. I mean, I think it's the view considered by people who think that breath carbonized likely telling the truth. But I don't see any clear reason why Ford would lie or fabricate the story completely and in fact you know are aware that some version of this story came up in her marriage counselling sessions, long before Cavanaugh was nominated and so on. So if you take those two views, if you hold open the possibility of Cavanaugh Innocence- and you are

charitable and assume that you know this isn't a smear. Then a mistaken memory is pretty that's the only explanation left and it also one that's, you know, sort of fits, I think, with the cultural climate right now where there is, I think, a right wrong presumption against just saying that women who come forward restores like this. Are liars and so you're, not gonna, wanna make that argument in certain cases, even if you think it's true, but I think the people you know the most famous case now. The story erupt at last night after will and sent out a series of tweeds which, since taken down and whale and the sort of now very unhappy head of the ethics and public policy centre who tweeted the professor Ford, may have mistaken bread Cavanaugh for a different classmate. He looked at what Christine for

call the Washington Post and figure it out. Okay, these people were named these poor people. Where did they live and look at what she had said and figured out what house it may have happened at because it was the house closest to the golf course and version of this mistaken identity theory that actually specifically identified another kid in seven oz class. Who look like

and for the fit. What whale and thought was the profile whale and actually name that classmate, whom he suggests may have sexually assaulted. Professor Ford, who was fifteen at the time the man is now a middle school teacher. I am obviously white sure that Wayland himself thought that this was a totally reasonable explanation and expected that in airing this, you know that he was going to sort of shake something loose, that he was gonna get somebody who knew more about this to come forward or that Ford herself was gonna, see this and say well, maybe I did make a mistake which obviously didn't happen. She quickly dismissed the idea, but I mean from my own perspective, you know The mistaken identity theories seems to me to visa. Still, notwithstanding the you know, the foolish tweet storm still the most reasonable way of reconciling the possibility. The Cavanaugh is telling the truth, with the possibility that she's entirely sincere yet, but I have a hard time buying that the mistaken identity theory is something that people who have adopted it genuinely believe in it

seems too convenient. It's the only one that allows it to be both ways. Sure, but I mean that's true of a lot of fairy right. I mean it's always hard to disentangle people's complicated motivations and coming to the theories that they hold, but that doesn't necessarily tell you anything about the truth or falsehood of the theory. I mean look the closer. You get

to the political process. Of course, the more cynical actors get- and you know when you are dealing with the average senator you know- They'Re- probably good, looking at poles and and has furtive in our thinking about what what am I constituents want now do I avoid facing a primary. There are so many imputation of bad faith and cynicism flying back and forth on this island into worth, assuming that, even if people's ideas or crazier dumb most of the time they're not coming to them through a consciously cynical process on both sides, I guess I'm just trying to parse. Do you see these camps as predominantly driven by principled thing? being or by a strategic approach to how best to deal with this situation and get it over with. I think that the main influence right now, it's less a sort of how do we get this

with and more a kind of tribal. We can't let these other guys win, which is slightly different. Remember, look. Conservatives are in a situation where, if Cavanaugh, aim- is withdrawn. There can still be another nominee, thou, obviously nominating someone else at this moment, creates all kinds of political complications. There's an election looming you might have to confirm them in a lame duck session. You know, you'd have to get Susan columns on bored with whoever you ended up nominating their money of reasons not to want to do this, but if haven't eyes a wounded nominees. It's not like you're, absolutely stuck with him, and what I see from conservatives is this sort of digging in based on what they perceive as these sort of unfair unreasonable tactics of liberals. So it's not a sort of cynical. How can we get this guy's through its? The much more tip

go of our moment tribal. You know if these people are against cabin all we have to be for him. You know, if you can has the right enemies. Then I've gotta be on his side, or else those enemies will win. I think that's the main psychological dynamic here, and what about the third camp Ross that conservatives are in the third camp just says: look this is a smear and were short the smear and were not interested incentive debating. You know whether he was a teenager and what difference that makes you know we don't need to be agnostic, its clearly a partisan hit job you can tell by the way, The allegation was managed or mismanaged by Democrats in the Senate and the wizard just confirmed Cavenaugh, because you can't be held hostage by the kind of smears or every nominee will be held hostage by them, and this camp, I should say, has actually gained momentum and support on the basis of the second allegation What do you mean so Ronan Pharaoh and Jane Mare published this piece in the new Yorker

where a woman came forward, saying that Cavanaugh had exposed himself to her during a drunken game that involve dildos or sex toys during freshman year at Yale and what's interesting, is that I think this camp has been strengthened and has grown, because I think a lot of conservatives looked at that reporting and thought it was unconvincing. Oddy and seemed more obviously sort of gin up by a search for a second allegation, and so they are reacting to that by a centrally hardening their position. By saying this looks more like a witch hunt, and if that's what's happening, then we can't let it happen it to hit job we have to fight it. Can I understand us what makes conservatives and perhaps your among them think that an on the record recollection of sexual must conduct which was contained in the

Yorker is flimsy is the timing when it came out, because it is now very rare earth into stone. It still, a very rare thing in our culture to have someone say on the record: something happened to me. It represents tremendous risk and fortitude. Certainly, but I think this is a context where the authors of the story acknowledged that this was an allegation that was not brought forward, but what sort of specifically pursued by democratic politicians and staffers. Looking for another allegation, I mean there's a whole discussion of how the accuser had deep uncertainty, more uncertainty than doktor forward about the allegation. There is all kinds of evidence contained within the story about how people who would be, according to her, in a position to confirm this story or on it. To confirm or deny it outright? You have one confirmatory witness who claims to have heard about it

in hand who won't identify himself and frankly, you have the fact that our own newspaper had attempted to corroborate the same story: and interviewed twenty five to thirty five people from this Yale class, who might be in a position to be able to confirm the story and was then, at the time the New Yorker ran with it unable to confirm it. I mean look, I forget, about being a conservative. I think there's a lot of journalistic uncertainty. Around the weight and credibility of the story. Right now that may change tomorrow it may change between when we're having this conversation and and when I live online, but I think that the neutral reader should be able to see in that story, certainly reasons to believe that it might be accurate but also reasons to see why it looks like, fishing expedition with a lot of uncertainty. Rounded and again, I think that if you're sort of in Cavanaugh Camp in any sense, that's gonna make you more sceptical of it.

But the first delegation remains as credible now as it ever was. So from the conservative point of view, why would a second allegation on top of a deeply troubling first, allegation undermine, rather than strengthen the case against cabin? Why wouldn't either as if the second and I'll only send out her? So why would we doubt this second woman? First of all, I think there are some reasons to doubt the first allegation, namely that you know we ve, been unable to find any sort of confirmatory evidence from

the people that Doctor Ford herself named, including one of her friends as potentially able to confirm it. So there is already some doubt about that allocation, and so then you get a second allegation and it seems less credible and more created by a partisan atmosphere than the first one. I dont think its at all surprising that that would make people who have reason to believe cabin are be committed to him feel that this feels more like a witch hunt. Basically it's out entirely fair, but I think it's sort of psychologically inevitable that that makes you cast more doubt on the first. One is well so the bottom line here where it stands right now, is that you believe that for conservatives who were sceptical, this gives them a reason to lean into that scepticism and camp three grows

and camp to shrinks as of right now, pending developments tomorrow. Yes, I would say there is a stronger rally around the nominee than there was before. I do think that me too, as a cultural movement has caused any these conservatives to make a different choice than they would have before me too, and if so, do you think it's because they had an authentic reaction to me too, or just simply because they understand that politically, the way you treat a woman's allegation has changed. I dont think that you can meaning.

Separate those two impulses. I think that undoubtedly, lots of conservatives were perhaps more willing to credit allegations against Cavanaugh than they would have been a similar allegations twenty five or thirty years ago, and that is connected to what happened in our culture and what me too has exposed, but I dont think parsing these sort of sincerity versus the pragmatists the mercenary as really reflects how the human mind works. The human mind, sort of internalized as things and in your conscious mind you are responding in a prince, Golden above board way and maybe in your subconscious, mind your suit of manipulating things so that the politics all fit together. But I didn't conservatives are just human beings like everybody else, and looking for the cynical explanation or the idealistic explanation is a mistake, it's all just muddled together,

Ross? Thank you very much. Thank you MIKE. It was a pleasure On Monday, conservative leaders rallied around Judge Cavanaugh, calling the latest allegations against him a choreographed campaign by the left to ruin his reputation, but I won't be perfectly clear about what has taken place. Senate Democrats and our allies are trying to destroy a man's personal and professional life on the basis of decades old allegations that are unsafe.

Created at uncorroborated. In a speech from the Senate floor on Monday afternoon, majority leader Mitch, Mcconnell challenge the allegation of a second woman, never Ramirez, first reported by the new Yorker, calling it a quote last minute smear that, Mr President, is why are we are? This is what the so called. Resistance has become a smear campaign pure and simple, aided and abetted by members nine states a few hours later, Judge Cavanaugh and his wife Ashley forcefully denied the allegations of both Ramirez and Doktor Blasi during an interview with news when I know it is the truth and the truth I've, never sexually assaulted. Anyone in high school

or otherwise. I am not questioning the have nots question that perhaps doktor afforded appointing her life was sexually by someone in some place. For what I know, as I've never sexually assaulted. Anyone in the interview Cavanaugh was asked about claims that he and male classmates drank heavily and targeted Women at parties would online allegations sexual assault, I'd, never sexually assaulted. Anyone I did not have sexual intercourse or anything close to sexual intercourse high school or for many years thereafter and the girls from the schools I went to, and I We were first name at all to all these years better at last January, emerging that's correct. Echoing conservative leaders, Cavanaugh said he would fight the allegations and that he has no plans to withdraw

nomination. I'm not gonna work, false accusations, drivers this process and we're lookin for a fair process where I can be heard and send the Mai Tag renew my lifelong record, my lifelong record of promoting dignity, for women, starting with the women who knew me when I was fourteen years old. I'm not going anywhere Do you believe that present Trump is going standby throughout Europe? stand by me. Call me this afternoon says stand by me

we'll do it back in response to covet. Nineteen people around the world are coming together to help one another in an unprecedented show of solidarity and resilience. Facebooks community help feature is making that easier from delivering groceries to neighbours donating to a local fundraiser food pantry community. How provides a place where you can offer or request support in your area? So if you need help or can offer it go to Facebook, dot com, slash, covert support, that's facebook, dot, com, sash covert, support, here's what else you can leave to another day. The times reports that, over the weekend, deputy attorney general ROD, Rothstein told to White House officials that he was

wrongly considering resigning after it was reported that he had suggested secretly taping president rum and discussed using the twenty fifth amendment to remove from office. Rosen Stein raised the idea of resigning with White House chief of Staff, John Kelly and White House Council Don again by Monday. Rubinstein was so convinced that tromp was about a fire him that his staff drafted a steep about who would succeed so far. He remains in his job, but is expected to meet with President Trump on Thursday to discuss his future

That's it. I'm like a mob on suitable zau con spent more than a decade, building conic adamant, the free remote learning platform now The sudden it seems custom made for today we realise is one of those moments where you look left. Look right. You're, like I think this is us, I'm unleash upper hosting pad cast that made all the difference. I'll be talking to some incredible people like Sal about how their managing the crisis, while helping others through it, find that made all the different anywhere. You get your podcast created by Bank of America,