Reality Check said:
aggiehawg said:
Quote:
Steinglass has gone back to the Wall Street Journal article published on November 4, 2016.
The purpose was to have Pecker explain that he likely learned the term "catch and kill" in the press.
Yesterday during cross-examination, Pecker said he learned of it from federal prosecutors.
Trump's eyes are closed and he's leaning back in his chair as Steinglass continues his redirect.
Seriously, wtf is going on in the courtroom?
Why does whether or not a 70-something=year-old man doesn't remember reading something eight years ago have any bearing on whether Donald Trump signed an internal financial record of something in 2017 to allegedly influence the election the year before?
I'd be a lot more respectful of Democrats if they simply admitted they have no legitimate criminal case here but instead want to spend eight weeks with Trump chained to a desk, keeping him off the campaign trail while airing a quarter-century of dirty laundry.
Dems never admit/acknowledge their game plan.
"We don't want open borders". But will fight every measure to secure the border and call you racist and xenophobic
"We want secure elections." But will fight every measure to secure elections and call you racist.
"We don't want your guns." But wil pass (un)reasonable gun control which effectively takes way all guns (see Chicago and DC type laws allowing a locked up gun only - one USSC vote away from getting their dream btw).
I've always said the same thing - they'd have more respect if they just said their true Desire - open borders and no guns or whatever. They'd certainly seem less ridiculous trying to justify their positions.