thing to you, and it just happened to be that there were two judges in the same story, what does that do to the credibility of your memory? Well, when memories are false, they're often suggested by something. So false memories are not created out of just nothing. They're usually created out of some experience you've had, something that's suggested. In fact, the main way that a false memory can be created is through questioning.

So if you were to take somebody in, and the person who was, let's say, saying they were accused of some crime or had some experience like a UFO... Let's say somebody comes and says, I think I saw a UFO. False memories can be implanted in that person. The details of that can be implanted by the person asking the questions. And this is very well established. There are studies that show you can easily implant false memories by putting them in a suggested form in the question.

So if a person came and said, I think I saw a UFO, here's how you would implant a false memory in that person. You would say, oh yeah, a UFO. Was it football-shaped or was it disc-shaped? You just implanted a false memory, because the person who said they saw the UFO didn't say that they saw a shape. And maybe it wasn't a distinct shape. Maybe it was a light. But if a person says, I saw a light and I think it was a UFO, and then the person asking the questions about it says, was it shaped like a football? What was it, more of a disc? Probably you just implanted a false memory. That's the way it's done.

Because the person who saw the light and was not registering it as a shape hears those two suggestions and says, yeah, I think it was more a little more football-y than it was disc. Yeah, it was football. It was football-shaped. Yeah, yeah, it was definitely football-shaped. And from that moment on, they'll start remembering it as football-shaped. So this is very well demonstrated. It's a known scientific process. It does happen as fast as I just described it. It's just like that. A false memory can be implanted in a normal person in a routine way that fast. It happens just like that all the time.

Now, if you had remembered a story about being attacked and you didn't remember all of the people there, but you remembered that one of the people there was named Judge... Let's say that's the only part you remembered. And somebody says to you, you know who else was there? Well, there was somebody named Judge, and there were some who were his friends. Somebody else was there. Was it... oh, it was Mike Kavanaugh. See what I just did there? So the person asking the question planted a false memory. Oh, I'm sorry, Brett Kavanaugh. Got his name wrong.

So what I just did was I implanted a false memory. And let me say it again so you see how easily it is. So if the victim says, in high school this bad thing happened to me and I don't remember all the details. I remember that there were four, I think there were four guys there. Can you remember any of them? Well, yeah, there was this guy named... his last name was Judge. I can remember him. Who else was there?

Now the name Judge is in your mind because it's the only person you could remember. And by the way, the friend whose name is Judge is not... he's not accused of doing anything. I don't want to start any false memories here. So the friend is not accused of anything. In fact, in her telling of the story, the friend is who took the attacker off of her. So the person who's named Judge is being remembered as a hero, not as an attacker. I want to be clear about that.

But once that name of that person named Judge is in her head, and years have gone by, and the other person she knew in that class who may have been at the party is an actual judge, memories conflate. So the fact that one person was named Judge and that's the one she remembers for sure makes the odds of her misremembering somebody who is also a classmate and also a judge... the odds of that becoming a false memory skyrocket.

Now, did everybody understand that? That because the friend's name was Judge, and you're dealing with a very false, or not false memory, but a vague memory, that the person asking the questions, if you got the accuser to say the name Judge... and I'm not talking about the reporter she talked to this summer. I'm talking about people she told the story to probably over the years. So it could have been twenty years ago she told the story for the first time, and she was telling her friend, and she's just telling the friend, you know, hey, it was these four guys. I remember one of them. One of them, it was named Judge. Who are the other ones? And then suddenly the word Judge is in her head, and she's thinking of the group of guys, and there's another one who happened to be a judge. Now he became a judge. What are the odds that that association would cause her to have a false memory of an actual judge? Pretty good.

So if you don't understand how likely a false memory can be planted, then you're a low-information voter. What are the odds it means nothing? You mean what are the odds that it didn't happen? The odds of some event happening to the accuser was... the odds that the accuser experienced an event, it's probably closer to a hundred percent. The odds of her remembering it accurately are vanishingly small. The odds of her getting the main parts important, which is, you know, was it an attack, who was involved, the odds of getting those big facts right, fifty-fifty maybe. I'd say fifty-fifty.

Yeah, I'm hearing some stories about Kavanaugh's mom being a judge who was involved in a case that involved the accuser's family foreclosing their house. I don't know how true that is or how much that matters. It's hard to know.

Now it's also relevant as we're picking out, you know, what's likely and what's not. What are the odds that the accuser would be a rabid Hillary supporter? What are the odds? Well, pretty good, you know, 50/50 or something. But why is it never the other way? Are we to believe that if a conservative had been sexually attacked that she would not come forward? So are you wondering about that? Don't you wonder? Don't you wonder? Yeah, had there been a conservative who had been attacked, would that conservative come forward? Oh, Anita Hill. But that's also ancient history. I don't think you can take too much from Anita Hill because that's just too long ago.

In our current climate, you know, our current hyper-partisan climate, what are the odds that it's always Hillary supporters who come forward? Roy Moore, his accuser was a Trump supporter. Okay, that's a good counterexample. I will accept your counterexample. I don't know if it's true, but I'm going to accept that it probably was. All right, so you saw two examples there.

So if you're asking yourself what is the importance or the relevance of the fact that the accuser was a rabid... I don't know how rabid she was. Don't want to read her mind, but she seemed to be a strong supporter of Democrats. And in the comments we saw two examples where it's not always the Democrat who's making the accusation against the Republican. So put that into your confirmation bias machine.

Yeah, the whole Keith Ellison situation is surprising. I don't know the reason for that. Do you have any idea why the Keith Ellison thing is not making a dent, and yet everything else seems to? Yeah, let's start it. Somebody made a comment. That's a good one. Because people believe, at least on the left, people believe that they're on the side of good and that the other side is evil. Pretty much anything is allowed. You know, the controls are off. Talk about your... you know, there's sort of a check and a control on human behavior because other people are watching you. You're normally... the fact that other people are watching you and you could go to jail for doing bad stuff, just the social control of people would cause them not to do terrible things.

But we've lost our social control because now people