Welcome to the Commentary magazine podcast today is Monday September. Seventeen, twenty eighteen, I'm John Paul words. The editor of commentary. Me as always a revolver senor other high Abe. I John no harassment or associate at our high Noah hygiene and senior writers are of a very high sorrow, potent So, Oh, I am. What are we gonna talk about guys? I guess the accusation. Against the Supreme Court nominee Bright Cavenaugh that at the

Of seventeen he was at a party and took now revealed Professor Christine Ford up to bed room at the party and fell on top of her and put his hand on her mouth and then his friend Mark Judge jumped on top of the three the two of them and then she somehow managed to extricate ourselves from underneath Cavanaugh. Away and that's pretty much the story, that's the story that she tells he'd categorically denies it He claims to have not contemporaneous support, but but there are therapist.

It's from twenty twelve that have some discrepancies with her account and then she patently took a polygraph the summer that revealed that she believed she was being truthful. If that is in fact, what polygraph do so we stand at an interesting crossroads because presumably Cavanaugh was gonna, be voted on at some point this week, Aronnax them the. I doubt very much. That's gonna happen now, because we are going to have some kind of a full hearing on this either privately or publicly or series of questions or whatever and the Democrats, who have no willpower to schedule or delay the scheduling of the swell, but are going to do everything they can to push this so that it goes beyond the elections in November. In

pace. They can win the same majority in the Senate and changed the ball game, which is tricky the way because, of course, even if they were in the Senate to still is the person who makes nominations to the Supreme Court. While they may think that the Merrick Garland Precedent of holding a seed open until after the next election will be acceptable in that they could use that to delay a nominee for Three years, I am not sure that eight months or nine months in three years are equivalent, even in the public mind, so Abe

I think you said you were this was scaring. You bet ya. I think the idea of going back into people's essentially their childhood before there before there, a teen and another thing stories that may or may not be true, and I and you know I'm not even somebody in speaking to the to the to the veracity of the claim the moment, but but coming up with tales about their character and their behaviour that could then come back to destroy their adult lives is a horrifying precedent and I think we should probably think of it. The way we think about treating children publicly actually in general, which is at their off limits. I think

this is in a way, a kind of extension of that I think I think childhoods arch or are or should be off limits as well. So there are two things that we need to do to get real, quick. Your claim that should sort of leave minors alone, the than the people who would argue with that would say, as John said earlier, and our pressure conversation that there's university extended by which minors who commit agreed as crimes can be tried, for example, as an adult, the keyword in that sentences tried. There is due process associated with this. There is no due process here and we cannot go. Us over the second point which, as you said, the I can't litigate the veracity of these claims. As of now, no one can mitigate the veracity of these claims. They are unfollow viable, It just do not have enough information associated with the accusation

and although much more than was previously known last week last week, it was it was too big to even be disgusting thing in a public forum, and it was a shame that it was. But now at least we can discuss it publicly, because this one has come forward to her credit and she deserves to be taken serious. Before that this committee. However, what we know right now is simply too vague. It is that this thing happen and we don't have a place and we don't have time and we don't have any corroborating witnesses, and it was thirty six years ago, and is it's really very difficult to verify that even the guy's gonna have a hard time with exotic

The thing that terrifies me the most along the same lines with a is again setting aside this particular accusation, because so much is right. Now we don't know, but it is a tendency among the media class on social media and I think it's becoming a part of the part of the site, guys part of the culture where the fact of there being an accusation, has come to a level culturally speaking to suffice to establish.

Someone's guilt of the most heinous life ruining types of allegations. Ok, but you know what we're talking about in this case in every case thing has been mentioned here, we're talking about Cavanaugh and what's fair to Cavanaugh, and of course this is about more than Cavenaugh right, and it's not just about whether it would be fair to him to be denied the Supreme Court nomination that he wants and he deserves better and all that it's about a culture a moment and about a political moment. So the first thing I would say is when people say why would anyone subject herself to the public scrutiny of you know in both of the screw

see that would come from this and that's what your why you can understand. She wanted to be anonymous, Professor Ford And- and why would anybody do this if she didn't? If it wasn't true- and she didn't have to well that the answer is contained within the question, there is a sense of real panic. You may remember upon Justice, Kennedy's retirement about the new Supreme Court Justice and a fifty three year old guy was nominated, which means that he could serve for twenty thirty forty years and if there is any circumstance in which, in political terms, for an ideologue in which the ends would justify the means, it would be that you wouldn't want this guy on the Supreme Court.

So what we kept hearing we kept hearing to weed so twenty or thirty things thrown out to see if they could derail him, nothing, nothing did, and so in that I am not saying that she's doing that's. What I'm saying is that it is absurd for anybody to say that in the case of a lifetime forms of the Supreme Court, which we are told liberals believe, will lead to the overturning of Roby Wade that people wouldn't pull out all the stops to see what they could do, to make this in every nice pretty for conveniently forgotten about the innuendo and and distortions and outright fabrications that were made by Democrats over the course of this hearing in the effort to render this nominee toxic and unconfirmed able, just because this one has managed to have some legs to it. All those other ones have been forgotten, but we should not forget them. They resolve part and parcel of the same tactic and again this

This allegation is very serious. It deserves to be taken seriously and no one is doing that, and that is my core problem with this. No one is treating this like the serious allegation? Why haven't there's one long you and wish you can get a fair hearing, and that is before the Senate Judiciary Committee? In all, I am hearing from these people on Twitter who org again of journalists sensibly, but who are acting like democratic operatives who are saying that the objects associated with a hearing in which all white men are our questioning, this woman's truth and her integrity. The optics portable there. That's it that's playing his political calculation. If you really want these allegations hurt in a serious for him and they cannot be adjudicated by any law enforcement. So that's where they're going to get it a political venue, if you think that's beyond the pale you're, not a series and you are doing the service that led me to move. I almost feel like doing get palpitating voice. You know an answer Yes, now let loose, because what I

by that is, look it up. We ve had too many appalling incidents right. This were mainly left lemme, Craddock, ideologues operatives, hoo hoo, because they're so committed to a certain abortion rights regime or a certain overall ideological kind of mixture aid. They are, they ve been willing to do anything to destroy good men. One of those good men was judged Bork, another one who almost got destroyed was now justice, Clarence Thomas, I would say another one who is badly damaged, although knows much wider case being not a very good Canada, but nevertheless was badly damaged by very false accusations was Mitt Romney, and so there is a part of me, a sort of dark night of the soul kind of moment.

Often where I think, maybe what I call let's say, bushes mechanism brahmanism- was too gentlemanly. It was at an end, and now we see it's, you know we salute that there may be there was there was a need for some one to punch backwards. Ok, so the punch back really hard guy nominated bread avatar, so that that kind of discredits her point a little bit here. Because the punch back Guy get ocean dominated Dodge Jimmy Piero under those under the logic that your were laying out. Not not bright, Cavanaugh who is nominal precisely because he was anodyne. He was respected and he grew clearer, left and right click said he was, he was somewhat colourless personality, namely Collins and Rakowski would confirm right. Ok, that's a fair point. So let us

let us pull back a little bed and then let me just try to make the argument that this concerns. Ok, Professor Ford says that this happened and we let us say that we should presume that she is telling the truth as she remembers it. Yet the allegation is thirty, six years old, she does not know where it took place. She can't remember where it took place. As far as we know didn't have an address. I mean she remembers the details of the room and whatever, but it she doesn't know what you know whose home it was in and she doesn't you know, and she unless, unless we hear more later

There are no contemporaneous. Supposedly there are no contemporaries accounts. The first person she told about this in two thousand to was her husband and, of course, just as you husbands can testify in your behalf, or you know, can't can be made to testify against you in court. Saying you told your husband. Something is not you know this positive, but let's would let us accept that she is telling the truth ass. She as she knows it that that is that. That is what she things happened, doesn't mean that that's what happened? That's one of the tricks of memory that we learned in the in the first wave of allegations of horrifying sexual practice in the case of child sexual abuse at daycare. Centers was that I mean arm my my good, my good friend

Commodore contributor? Palma Q is written extensively on on memory works, ended and the and how you know memories can essentially be filtered through and changed by post, and circumstance and to them What the individual doesn't believe along at all. That's what I'm saying and I am not saying, she's lying but anyway I why keep wanting to say this, because one of the reasons that the allegation is credible as people keep saying is. That, of course, is credible. I mean with that that the story that smiles plausible story that she tells a story that makes perfect sense. Anybody who has been alive in the United States for the last fifty years, or indeed, maybe who has ever been alive on this planet- that you know that too agers in a no unsupervised, his setting where there

as alcohol that you know, men make physical Advances on women, boys make physical advances on girls, and the girls may not like it made squirm away from it, and this is one of the many reasons that traditionalists likes or of a and b of the less. I am less of the traditional list. I would say that sort of- look at the look at the world in which we live and with concern because there are no guard rails boundaries or social protection of the sort that once existed to help teenagers in particular by making it difficult for them. Or more difficult for them to act out they her unthinking, repped, reptilian brained preferences, and you know that

why you had chaperones that dances, that's why people would never be allowed their children to go to a party at a home where the parents were not at the house modest. Why modesty norms for both, and then where's colleges where men were not allowed upstairs after nine o clock of women's door, the dorms were single sex, the schools were often single sex. All of this was done to make it possible for the beast, the human beast, to be tamed by not constant, we are putting temptation, but now again now we have. If thou. Having said all this, we have to defend break havoc as there's no evidence. I never. Anything like this in high school. I never even kissed a high school, so I I can personally free to say the Bermuda, it's possible to go through high school without having being having done something like this but life. May you know it's not fair. It will

this. I think ties into my original point about this being scared, because I adults cannot be made to answer for the things that did as it as a child for four neurological reasons. In part, I mean beds, as you say you when you're, when you are your younger- you are you do now I have the same fully formed brain you do not have you are not the same person in India rate. Many biological ways is that you are as an adult and you have not had the training and eve rolled experience in any of it it did not not only do can do live to regret, having on things is a child youtube. There are things you can look back on. You don't even understand how you got to the point that you did them. Little Bell that every time we step on a landmine that could destroy us here here have what about me. I guess I'll always gave a little list here. Ok, so you can come with it. We ve been questioning, led them, the

then take a memory of alleged victims thing, that is that's one. That's gonna get you in serious trouble then the need to acknowledge the fact that there are these inherent male vices I mean is essentially the theocratic ideology which forces women behind Veils it is. It is not impossible for men to control the urges, even when they're young and hormone raging, and that is not something that we should excuse, that kind of behavior just because they are there young thing. There's there's also that, as as a headset in in high school, The notion that you can you hear behaviour in high school shouldn't should reflect on you in your in your adult. Life has just simply not true doesn't happen. That way for all of us, all of us are by their permanent record, follow us everywhere in the union. Will now it's really Joe? I mean this was interesting about this. Is that now parent almost obliged to reinforce this point with there children on a daily by EVA fourteen year, all them- and I haven't really she I've- really.

In this position yet, but you know the idea now that everything is permanent, because it's because people do things and then they get post on social media. That stuff is never racism, so that there could be a thing where you do something foolish or untoward herb, silly or stupid, and there's a of you and Instagram and ten years later, your dear boy, you know someone wants to hire you and sees a picture of you. You know, the giant with a thirty two ounce beer it's time you know at Bernal Beach, you know taking your top off that I this I'm making this up in my daughter's for demons, never see how the baseline I'm just saying like you. Can now presume that anything that you do want haunt you. Now it's very hard, and this is where the teenage brain thing comes in very hard to establish the notion that you better watch behaviour when you're sixteen or seventeen, because when you,

three you might want to be a non right before the Supreme Court that it nice of you cannot. That is that. That is a deeply the old idea that that the consequences are part of the consequences. Are forever. I that you, you know you better, be careful as we understand that as adults actual we do and eat out. You know that's why, when you, when you see these cases, one of the things are so horrifying about the bad me. Two cases like harming sooner, that is, there is quick sculpt. There is no exculpation I'm in the only exclamations of these cases as well. I was incredibly drunk or I was high or something like that, but there's no exculpation, because the The explanation is, I was not in my right mind and teenagers are not really in their right mind problem here Is that Cavanaugh says it didn't happen, so he says

so. The whole thing is, she says this happen and he says is now set a twice because he said again this morning. This did not happen. I did know so thing. I have never done any such thing. I want clear, my name now feed said I dont. Remember I dont want high. Really I mean there were We were all young once all of that. That would be a different and he is there established the point that either there's no way for him to clear his name, and there will be a shame if he gets nominated if he gets. If he gets confirmed, this will shadow him for the rest of his life as the new allegations have Shadow Clarence, Thomas, we live steer Jeff Tobin Bra wrote a piece about how Thomas should be impeached and job has apologised for his for not being more

aggressive right in that process, which is a shocking embroidering, how he behaved himself. So so it's done for Cavanaugh like unless some miracle have. That is whether she is totally discredited hildy. He get confirmed, and it will still be while there Two. There are two abusers on the Cypriot, so that's not happening, and we- and I want to go into the politics of this- that the strategy that Republicans should do going forward. They have this hearing how How could they pull cabinets nomination all that stuff, but from injustice? The strictly, you know, saw a philosophical, moral point of view. That is why, as of now, based on what we know, you have to vote to confirm, you have to confirm dutch cabinet, and you have to let these allegations. Everywhere you go because otherwise we need to describe why, because we haven't. You said this thing about due process, but I think it's fair to go through not just I'm in law, but moral law, natural law

the law, all forms of law that we have, which is that a single accusation without evidence cannot be a duke, cannot be made to be the evidence of that of a crime. That someone is convicted, for that is our. That is justice from the very beginnings of justice to accusers per crime. That's in the Bible! that's an that's in the Hammurabi code. That is, that is because how can you accuser and a supporter or to accusers named the like, can't you can't: do it anonymously either for Very reason that someone could be doing this to say see some property right? That would have been the biblical case that you you you you need, have these accuser so that someone doesn't come along and takes

but he else's. You know if a flower and steal it what what this new sexual regime proffers in response to that is, that all of those norms going back to Hammurabi Code and going back to the old did the Hebrew Bible and so forth. Those are all those reflects male preferences and male, predatory, biases and so forth, and so a new kind of substantive justice is needed because those procedure unknowns. Going back to tat, you noted to the very beginning, are all tainted. That's that's exclude extremely dangerous. Every time someone says oh, but you know true. Justice requires us to set aside procedural norms,

That way lies kind of unravelling of civilization, all fashionable crimes Lois. I found it in that the crimes are fashionable, but the d, but that the crime becomes a pretty big international as particularly heinous at any given time involved, the relaxation in some fashion or other of evidentiary and procedural standards- and this happens all the time it happened? Let's say after nine eleven one part of the idea was you needed to baby, we needed to relax standards in terms of you now holding people without bail or something like that. When when the issue was child sexual abuse in the nineteen areas in which there were there were dozens of unjust, illegitimate convictions on the basis of testimony given by four and five and six year olds being coached

there was the idea that the standards should be relaxed which, as you can't take testimony from a five year old, well, doesn't know the difference between fancy in reality, but then like you, have to believe the children? Why don't we believe the children? What's why? Why would a child lie? You know what have, and so as always happens as this is like some The new once came up with this idea of my my favorite crime for your favorite crime. Nothing is needed other than you know other than the chair. You know if you, the crime that you think is worse than every other crime. The notion that innocence that the notion of them, the the keys entered in western common law, which is that you are innocent until proven guilty needs to be real

but even with either I'm so tat, even by the standards of the meat to moment, which in many ways have the flavour of moral panic, but was nevertheless very important and expert exposed. Allow these ossified Paul private institutions that were shielding monsters from that the justice they were do but Eve this is so politicized that is departing from the standards by which we established how you get convicted in the meat to moment, to use the term conviction very loosely there's that peace and then in the new Yorker by Ronan Pharaon, J Mare, which exhibits all the flavour of Jane Mayor Pope, and none of IRAN and therapies there as well. Accusation is extremely vague, didn't announce, anybody's name had come out later. It didn't have very many detail. About this accusation, it's not like somebody was saying: oh yeah, I did this I'm guilty or there were multiple people saying this, and it went so far as to excuse. Diane fine stands bizarre behaviour of putting this out there because

You really want to get back to the substance of the sort she wanted to go back to legal procedure, get away from the personal accusations and attacks on Judge Cavanaugh, suggesting that this whole thing has been a real flop and they were absolutely performing some publish it. We should talk about your damage here, but you should table your target because remember so, let's take the case of Roy more again, not not anything that was that was dealt with in a court of right, and this is not a legal matter. This is a political matter, be you know the M, a nomination Supreme Court, the advice and consent of the Senate. This is a political action and Roy more was running for Senate and the story starts MT and what was key to the story that made it that you couldn't just when he came out and said that these are not, as is all nonsense. It was these that's right. There were in the end, I think AIDS,

separate accuser, saying that he was in a fever file that he had pursued them as under age. Is it our eighteen and under right and when he was himself in his early thirties and older, and so was the it was the agglomeration of detail, the fact that there were multiple cases so Lee Harvey wine steam. Similarly with less room this that what made it overwhelming word, the number I'll frank and which is of which is something that of Democrats Way was a bloody tunic. Wasn't would like. There was one person, even though, that those accusations that resulted in his resignation, I think we're probably survival. Anyway. The owl thing that that annoys me today by the way, because alpha Lincoln was defenestration by Democrats, not by republican defenestration, by Christa Chill a brand on the grand and and quit to be,

good soldier. By the way. That's the thing about Frank and whom I know not that I've talked him about this. But the idea was the Alabama Senate seat was You know the he needed to go to make the case that it's, the republic actual who'll back there, have you ever those at Roy more if Roy more wines that he'll be in the Senate and Democrats can make this a single issue for twenty eighteen and then we're lost but AL, had already resigned his seat, so that was again a political act and now Democrats are saying it so unfair. What happened to frank enough haven't. I can do this Democrats did that to themselves. Democrats did that to Frank, and I think it is important very important to remember that that that you know one photograph of him, you know not putting his hands on the sleeping woman's breasts, but looking like he was getting ready to. You now ended up the Santa career. But let's talk

Could I do process right are or the right to face your accuser or the notion that you should be? Could you you you should you cannot be convicted on the basis of a single accusation without any evidence, but that's a core rooms? That's a court room standard- and this is a political matter cell drawn cultural, political and as a means of political matter, because the only way that it is the Senate that you decades this in a non legal hearing. It's totally oh here and all of us on on Twitter and that's what I mean in the sense that did most of the meat to cases nearly all of them haven't been, have not played out in a court with those types of standards, but in the court of public opinion and a sense of how much pressure can this person stand like? Oh, it's only one accuse. Oh it's too. Ok, that's fine, but oh sweet active some over. He needs to go. That's how they ve all played out just a

but you one earlier point you made, and we talked about in the pre Show- is that setting aside Brett Cavanaugh because he categorically denies, but the very fact of there being these kinds of interactions in which very few The young men and women are together in situations where there were all everyone's drunk and everyone's ability to consent and mitya and have good judgment is diminished by alcohol and drugs, and that in an end- and this is the world that we ve created specifically? It's not him. There's always happened, yes is always been sexual, transgression and so forth. But to do this degree of experts measure and the paranoia three decades later of of what might have happened. Who said what blubber blood is purely a product

of of the demolition of those barriers between the sexes in the in the sixties, and now the me to movement is trying to correct it. I think rightly so. I think the reckoning is fine, but is trying to corrected without rethinking any of the premises of the sixties. About about you know the differences between men and women of what it takes, two to remove men and women from from six. Missions in which their their proximity to the occasions of sin of we're we're not talking about any of those same wealth, and we have our current totally libertine standards. They're gonna be maintain, Everyone can do what everyone is no more that's the norms in dimension modesty norms is sexes than evil is now restraints on anything. But at the same time, if you make the slightest mister you will be ruined, so they are. They are doing that they just really resent the terms that you ve put it in in these any sort of moral terms. We this very amusing episode in which vocs dot com had a Christmas part,

and they limit hid the alcohol consumption that you were allowed to, because there were men and women private present at this hurry, and there is the height of the meat to moment. They were very concerned about what interactions could occur, more people who were drinking more than two drinks that were free copy for more but that was, would you got free drinks, two readings, and that was it and it was. Moral code was an attempt to impose some sort of restrictions on your ability to transgress against these these this image, this more behaviour that we were all very much having a panic about that time. But if you'd moment, if you notice this- and it was only conservatives who noticed this and said that this essentially the temperance movement. You know we're safe rating people bar segregating by gender and limiting alcohol consumption because its evil. If you were to say that, then you were the problem, but there were still engaging in what you're talking ass, a really good point, okay. So so there were aspects of the old dispensation that are things that

We do not accept now that we're more are. Morally repelled by right, which is Yeah racial aside from the abbot. There are certain notion about about about purity, sexual purity. That is, I mean, I mean that were offended by it and thereby so it out with religious face that look. This way, but that a woman is somehow ruined. You know, where people are you don't people are ruined for life by having sexual. Congress before marriage, or something like that like there is question can you eat a week? You can put the Genie back in the model, because there are things that we just simply don't accept. Any more is being served like the way things ought to be, well- but they do go along- they were an important element of the disciplinary protocols.

That our the shaming protocols that allowed you to keep people separate or said this was better than that. Letting you can also go in. So you wild out. Even if you were were female, that you would be ruined and that you now there you would do you would be viewed as of as a as an imperfect and destroyed creature and that serve horrifying right, so the we Composition of the real position of these standards is in very different. For many reasons, not least of which that we don't accept various of the premises that created the arctic texture of these separations. However, the notion that The notion that you do not need that men that boys and girls did not need to be separated for both of their goods at certain points in their lives to help them from making terrible mistakes or

from being the victim of somebody else's terrible mistake, not crime, because maybe they were too times when a crime that was it. That's that's entirely lost and it really should be because then you're just then you're, then you're, just you're like you're living, loose people, young people who don't have the ability to police themselves yet fully. I don't think that's the case the seventeen year old necessarily, but none the less I sit still you know we just have made it, and did this happen? three and, as I said on Twitter, the other day like the pie like sexual morality of nineteen. Eighty three was actually much much looser than it is now, and I mean I in general, even though you think will everything's degraded, never things much worse. So I thought of that You know a movie that was released, nay, nay, three, revenge of the nerves and in revenge of the nerves, one of the one of the you'll excuse me for saying climate moments in the movie is where Louis

The nerd dresses up as Darth Vader, because the head of the evils, fraternity, is also draw since Darth Vader and finds his girlfriend and sleeps with her making her think that he is because he's behind the Darth Vader mask her boyfriend and it's the best sex she's ever had, and he takes off the hood and reveals that he has just raped her and she declared that she's in love with him now, and that movie was a huge it methyl? That's the sexual morality right here. You could make double we today right, because we don't believe in the notion that really funny for someone to trick somebody else by having sex with them, because they were mean to you before right.

Like those ends. Just don't justify the means there, so you know it having. I think I will take a break for a second and talk a little bit about ancestry, dot com. Is this episode of anti of Commentary magazine Pike asked is sponsored by ancestry, with ancestry DNA, the leading consumer dna test. You learn a more complete story of you. Well, are you discover with ancestry? Dna find your origins and more than three hundred and fifty regions around the world, too It's more geographic detail than any other dna test. All it takes is a symbol tests that can be done from the comfort of your home within ten million people have discovered their story with ancestry. Dna learn more about yourself and your own story answer dna offers an interactive, an informative experience that uniquely connects you and your with your genealogy heritage ancestry. Make amends minds: advance dna science with the world's largest online family history database tracing.

Ancestors migration journeys through time bill. The tree on ancestry by the largest collection of online family history, records and magnifier dna results for more insight into your genealogy and origins. So no, I think you did this right, just exe what you dick, I haven't, got the results around the results it back in the mail, but done so we got a kid. For my son a long time ago, and we didn't do it because we're looking at this thing they had to spit into it, and it seemed to me like it was just going to be an onerous task for a child to do I was wrong. I hadn't even opened the gate, the kid when we did it we opened up, and it's not really is really something that is difficult to do at all, because it has been in a thing, but it's like two spits and then you're done send a right and so on. It was very easy process for me,

I am definitely going to ask my son to do this now. I was afraid that he would reject it, but you're not line on your son is gonna. Have one interesting ancestry dna report right I mean there are there's a lot different on an that's my wife's amass where we're all over you are. You are diversity, your diversity for some very american aid by believe you you'd. You have done a deal, a test- and you discovered amazingly enough well there- for two steps with this is the other interesting but ancestry that comes out there, because they are getting more and more data from more people joining up. They are refining there results, so I initially did it and found out that, am. Ninety two percent european jewish very recently got an update clicked on it went on their got my update turns out. I am one hundred percent european jewish good. Have well, who you know who does that's right. I mean

me over with feathers. What I'm saying so gonna ancestry that comes commentary today for twenty percent off you're ancestry. Dna. Kid! That's answers dot com, slashed commentary for twenty percent off your ancestry, dna KIT, ancestry, dotcom slashed commentary, and we thank ancestry for sponsoring the commentary. Podcast so, let's talk about politics now so syrup. Why don't you propound you're you're theory that Democrats may be met. May for the long term goal of deny? break on the from court, even if they believed, by the way that this is necessary. Are morally and spiritually and foundational unnecessary are they doing themselves damage well.

If you remember when we were talking about who trumps, should nominate the agreement was that that Cavanaugh is not the choice he would have Trump would have made if he wanted to energize social conservatives and real up his base. I think I argued in and so did rust outfit and many others that that choice would be Amy, Coney, Barrett, the North Notre Dame LAW, professor, very orthodox, catholic mother, of seven science offered eyes. He checked off all sorts of boxes that we're just catnip for for social conservatives like me, but he didn't. He picked bread, Cavanaugh. In some ways you know he's he was a Kennedy clerk. In fact, their story suggesting that Kennedy insisted that that did he did, he would be selected. Should Kennedy himself step down. You know he didn't have that social concerns.

Save time never so nevertheless, and end the and the nomination, since when on there's nothing, he said that was that exciting, but I think that now precisely because he's such an anodyne character for for Democrats to take him down on the Add the allegations as they stand, which is very little to nothing for behaviour alleged to have occurred. When the two were seven, in a house. She doesn't remember and situation. Which he doesn't remember at all in denies completely there if they manage to take him down, I think that would energize the republican base. Strongly out and to what extent are what percentage point boosts the Republicans would receive in November, but I think the outrage of the rage in the Pandit class is clear because I'm seeing people who are normally supremely anti Trump fed up with the trunk dopey rallying too to galvanise it is- and I think that will filter

I believe it or filter down I've seen a lot of concern there's more on the social right. We not all who are two of a kind of adopted, an agnostic approach to what is it in really an existential crisis for this nomination because they believe two things one. Is that will waive the bloody tuna can be very energized to vote by the by the the loss of denomination. The monitoring of this nomination under these circumstances and, second, that I think that Amy Coney Barrett is next that she's going to get the next knob and she's a better nominee and she's going to be confirmed somehow, even though this process has been corrupted. I think that this is all wishful thinking that Amy only bear is even if she is the next nominee that you are consenting to the to the Kent. The corruption of a process by which she would get confer and she is a more controversial nominee in many ways, and I dont think that it would be an easy way to get her can through us. Moderate conservative

I'm lookin, like Collins, like Mc Caskey, who work and be hold out for somebody who has real constitutional objections, throw even though those objections are genuine and valid, and also the process by which they think this is going to happen. In a lame duck session, for example like cramming them through in the lame duck. That's not gonna happen that would just be way to toxic, especially of Democrats. We take one of the chamber's you're, both chamber, for that matter. Well, I just don't see whether gaming this through it seems to me like they're, trying to justify what is essentially is an attack on a nominee. They weren't, really all that jazzed about when really there in the dark here to everybody has to go into the foxhole for this one. Otherwise, everyone loses the again if you, if you take the the idea that a single unsubstantiated charge from thirty five thirty six years ago,

becomes a disqualifying act. And doors box that you are opening using this. The soul. You think that a republic- is the sole person who's gonna get nailed, let the the frank and stories are very could cautionary tale in this regard. You know you What politician aside from Roy more who didn't get to seat suffered from the meeting moment, movement, a Democrat Al Frank, and why What happens now, if thirty, if behaviour thirty six years ago, becomes a stand by which people can be nigh things Democrats take this a white house in twenty twenty Republicans may We have the Senate even in twenty, even if a democratic wins everything Old nominee for every single office will anything that they did in high school.

Be a reason to deny them a confirmation, my concern is that, whether aren't. You deny people confirmations based on these kind of tactics. We can close these pandora's box. That we're at a point in our political work Farewell: that's it I'm going to make someone think twice about it. Just because it work last time I think, there's a sort of desperation. I always necessary of throw the kitchen sink additive to try to stop it. No matter what I mean I am, I am reminded in political terms, of what Mitch Mcconnell to Harry, read in twenty thirteen when Harry Red Exercise, As the nuclear option and ended the filibuster from lower court, judicial nominees and Mcconnell said you will rule the day. There will be a day in which this will be turned on you and right now, Mcconnell has been shovelling through Trump

judicial appointments like like call all into a writ, do a runaway locomotives engine and you know That is a very striking thing that happened to me that that would situation. We, when you do something, because it's good for you at the moment, because you want bread, Cavanaugh Weather, you believe we're not another word like thirty years ago. This wouldn't worked, air like it didn't work in the case of an Eu Helen, it wouldn't have worked. I give me the hills alley. Where at least about Clarence Thomas as an adult and not as a not as a teenager but it wouldn't work, then, because there was more sense of the there was more of a problem Preservation of sense, You were you. You like changed precedent on these things, your own risk, because you weren't necessarily gonna, have control of everything forever and that institutional

rules and regulations meant to protect the integrity of the institution would serve you when you were in the minority, just as you are in the majority, Similarly, but it wasn't really wrote the balloon classic gotten Elden me to moment either with everybody in the private business writers and wild and entertainment right, but why? Because it became a coup bread, though that was the real question, is what the back hold up. Would your corporate meanings makes up with people? We know when you're Disney at your making guardians of the Galaxy three, do you need the director having made horrible? Having said stupid on Twitter and by email to be. An issue in every piece, that's ever written about the movie and thus the harm the movies chances. When you spend two and two hundred million dollars on it do you need if your Disney and you have all these regulatory issues before and why

clinton- and you have John lasted most important executive being handy with his AIDS dune, really need every time you will bring up something before the FCC someone say: will we shouldn't? Let you have your license for your owned and operated television stations B cause. You have sexual predator on your knowing your senior management and save, with less moon vis CBS right. So there that's that's an accountable, that's a capitalist accountability, standard right and which the notion it's not fair, to do x to John Lasso. That's not the way it works. It's not about fairness, it's about protecting company right, so here we have, and so that that work brilliantly. I would say, in that sense like as a as it became a institutional standard because of the potential threat to the livelihoods. Are the profitability of accompany this is an entirely different. This is a political process.

There are no rules. The constitution doesn't say what the weather grounds are for advice and consent or but denying nominations all bets I hope that you can say anything. You can do anything, so this is subject to the politics of this, because it is exclusively pulp political. So we were talking earlier about how, in others, this sort of obnoxious democratic theme that being echoed by again ostensible reporters or saying this, that she can't get a fair hearing before the judiciary. Because they're all white male, but that's the only place where the be a hearing and that's likely what's gonna happen right. We all pretty much like that. She's gonna be called to testify before coming right. Well, she says she wants to be. The committee. I have clearly and Conway said that she should be allowed, are investigating it and they don't think they don't really want to, but I don't think they have much of a choice. So does brick avenues nomination survive that testimony, because for me, that's a pretty open question

I mean it appeared annals. I've had a performance, she delivers. Obviously we don't know whose worthy Emily and are used alarm performance very deliberately okay. So if we take the Clarence Thomas precedent. Ok with both in the air. Every way you want to go depending on whether you believe him or you believe, Anita Hill, the way it works, Clarence Thomas case was this hill came, or word finally or was, are forced out, and then she, when she testified- and she made a good impression, so that was after the hearing was over and then so Thomas came after, she testified and Thomas came out at down that chair- and he said this- is a high tech, lynching. I am a black man sitting from a bunch of white men and you guys Gonna take me down, and this is why I am calling this a lynching do this. Never did it, and you know you're, just trying to take me down and what happened.

Southern senators, the very southern senators who had derailed Bork by the way using weird standards like how half of Alabama said that he opposed Bork ass. He had been a socialist in college. I mean literally a guy like that. Was there is how he that was how he justified voting. Export got scared, Thomas scared them and Thomas's polling was good Cavanaugh it seems to me- and this is where it gets tricky Cavanaugh doesn't feel to me like he has the intensity of support Among inability or democratic centres and Thomas Case- and it was the idea that a black man was saying from them saying you voted me I'm telling black people. You know they Betty Black I just went on for the Senate and they shot him down, and you know you know this will happen to you too and again, like the polling that weak Steve Chronology of MSNBC reminds us for

Thomas, particularly among blacks, was good and and democratic sent were scared away from voting against them. Just Cavanaugh have that kind of I know where Burnett there's all its negative partisanship now, but this Cavanaugh have that kind of emotional support like our people you know it's like Bork, had its base. Among the intellectual class of the Republicans that saw this is as a as essentially is a martyrdom at Teddy Kennedy, his hands, but like anybody has particularly strong feelings about bread, calibre and just has deliberately not courted any strong right exactly is made. It has made himself a very ended. I care I wouldn't say that meal Gore such quarterly strong feelings of people's somehow, maybe just ass. He was the salvation from Eric Ireland or something seemed to just have this reservoir of good feeling about him set such that even now, all you have to do is say the name Gore such people smile happily on the right and with great success.

Ok, so I'm just saying like it's it's weird though I don't feel like the in the what went on a lot of people and a lot of us will see as the injustice being done to have an hour will provoke a grand while large grassroots response, particularly when there is the site yeah that you poo poo, that you don't maybe trump particularly in his own weight, would nominate somebody way more conservative justice also just to stick all know. I don't think that I think republic. Will have no choice but to do the exact opposite of nominating suitor bridegroom, I'm just saying I listen I'll United Democratic Right to hold on no there's a bizarre fantasy on both. Let me be clear here: there's a bizarre, fantasy on partisans on both sides? There's the social conservatives who think Amy call me bear it is next in line, and then there are Democrats who think Trump will be constitutionally obligated to nominate Merrick Garland, like they're all aversion, they're, all lunatics about this sort of thing

I am positive that tunnel troubled and none of those things give us somebody who will be very different and a lot of different ways and in the ways I think that people will want, especially like I do think that this is a real, significant trap here, unless, unless Mr Cabinet Component put in a substantial performance, I think that creating this this hearing in the sort of very similar to the immediate he'll Clarence Thomas episode is, is a close to an unwinnable. Sorry, I'm with no one is in the sense that I think, unless she can bring something more to the table beyond her vague recollections, some date some place some witnesses, something as things stand, I think the Democrats, Republicans. Should she confirmed this. Is this sets a very negative effect on a shared? This is not a should concentrate its not for their own good. It's not us. Good question now, because we're not talking about the real world. So the question is: will this spook.

They just need to lose tube that here's, I would just say, has already said I throw you says you want to hear it out of the way. Only about not me something. I just work semitic. Nobody says he wants a here. Right I face and he leaving the Senate and Jasper he's, probably on the huge readier again use other judge Origami Bob quarter said he wanted to wait until eleven to tell you that you can have a guy negative recommendation over cement. Iran deal by engineering that nobody, chronic dross. That's the that's immaterial really! Your Jeff Lake is as right wing as they come, and he said she we heard okay, so fine a letter be heard. I think everybody now think she should be heard. Fashion rather she's thrown this charge out and she needs to be come out in public and try to me The case that what she is saying is true that we, if it is if it is imposed upon us that we are simply to accept that what she says is true, I don't know who she is. I don't know anything about her,

I don't know whether she's uh, you know what you know. Of course, a person or not, as I said, the allegation is credible because at this Bribes behaviour, we all know, takes place, but that doesn't mean that her allegations, Gretel she has to do- is create the the shred of the pot, the potential for doubt that Judge Kevin. I lied before the commit right. Usually about what he knew about her run this event, and if that, even if there is a patina of evidence that that he did they not Ok, let's let's go with the politics, so there's two interesting things about it, one of which is, I think, now the democratic senators from the Trump states who I think a bunch of us thought would just would vote for, would vote for Cavanaugh. So as they so as to make the case that they could work with Trump, they are there now off the hook for voting for him and can vote some, which means that it has to be fifty one Republican centres voting for right, sir.

If Collins and Rakowski the two centres open under the most pressure in relation to, though you know, potential overturning Roby weighed down they don't want to vote for him. He's he's done. It fled. Sides. Annual forum he's I've done unless one other does, but so This all now comes down to what happens over the next two weeks. Basically she a credibility issue that assumes that the voters delay, which I guess, we're all assuming it supposed to be Thursday. Well, I mean at some point the committee flake and cork, or what to say. I will not vote to confirm if you rush this right, they ve said they wanted delayed. They will have to put more pressure on Mcconnell. I'm saying you better re this. What graph, trucker progress, chuck rascal. Exhibit you better delay this or well or or a vote not to confirm, but by the way that the

If that is so Judiciary Committee does not vote vote him out Uncle Phil Schedule a vote on the floor so that a damning talk. A cloud over the line. I know I'm as others, but the cloud audited also everybody out of committee and still confirmed yet, but you can help me yeah already, but you could so just say. You know what allows outbreak the vote, the clouds there. You know it's done, the clouds there, that's that's. The real danger is that is that anyone can now say anything about a personal, a prominent person and an end and have a substantial effect on their reputation. True or not on the grounds that we are obliged to believe accusers with again flies in the face of you now everything we know about the common law criminal law since time immemorial

It is the great temptation of life of my favorite crime. We now have the fashionable crime. It's like you need relax, evidentiary standards to make sure that the guilty are punished. Well before the meeting moment, that was Hillary Clinton thing. New women have the right quote. To be believed, which eventually, she deleted from her website, because I've got an antenna. Trouble was essentially was. It was an attack on due process and the presumption of innocence, but it was nevertheless articulation of what this particular group believes threw up in her face regarding prevailed here with That was the other major problem among many other major problem, so we will see how this goes. Obviously, as as with the worst concluding sentence in the world: for all such news. Analyses only time with that.

Meanwhile, no Rossman and sort of Amorium John Power, its keep the candle burning,