One of the things we’re seeing this morning is a new narrative developing that despite all of the flaws in the New Yorker hit piece on Kavanaugh, as evidenced by the New York Times this morning, Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer should be commended for admitting said flaws in their article:

Great. Here’s a cookie for your bang-up job, but the New York Times had it right, not the New Yorker:

But this might turn into a bigger problem for Farrow and Mayer. Here’s Farrow being forced to defend his reporting on CNN this morning, saying the Kavanaugh piece “exceeds the evidentiary basis we’ve used in the past in several cases that were found to be very credible”:

Whoa, buddy. Is that even true? The Kavanaugh piece met the same standard applied to “Weinstein, Schneiderman, Moonves, etc.?”:

“What is Ronan doing,” other than torching his good reputation: