Is he saying that the witness might not be so credible having been convicted him or her self? As if no prosecutor has ever put a witness of compromised credibility on the witness stand before and had a jury decide that just maybe the word of the "compromised" witness was more credible than what the defense was providing? I'm sure that given the facts a jury would take the word of "compromised" Cohen over "unindicted coconspirator" Donald Trump a habitual liar where the New York Times counts more than 40,000 lies he has told in 4 years, from the oval office too boot.
No comments:
Post a Comment