Not a fan of Buttercup or any of his shenanigans, but see the problem of accepting all Cohen says without absolute proof it is true. When he offers ‘evidence’ for which he has no proof, and he admits to lying for his former boss, does that set a pattern of behavior that will discredit him in all other testimony? Same for any pol on the dais, i.e., what’s his/her real agenda?
Not a fan of Buttercup or any of his shenanigans, but see the problem of accepting all Cohen says without absolute proof it is true. When he offers ‘evidence’ for which he has no proof, and he admits to lying for his former boss, does that set a pattern of behavior that will discredit him in all other testimony? Same for any pol on the dais, i.e., what’s his/her real agenda?