If you attempt to speculate in court, opposing counsel will object "speculation, your Honor," or "no facts in evidence, your Honor,"
I understand about the factual presentation of evidence. You gather the facts. You filter the facts. You adjudicate the accuracy of the facts. What happens if your facts were in error. CB, we're splitting thin hairs here.
I ask you again. Would you not use your powers of persuasion to convince the jury/American people, that the facts are accurate? If, in fact, you believed them to be true?
This is very subtle and the "Bush lied" mantra is nothing more than a spin coming from those who were not privy to the facts. Or at least, as someone said, cherry picked the facts.
I've said it before, what's done is done, and history will be the final judge. You or I will not probably be around to hear the outcome of whether Bush's presentation was factual. |
