a woman that said she too was drugged and assaulted by bill cosby in 1986. what she testified to was strikingly similar to what andrea constan says happened to her. they said back in 1996 she said in a deposition everything happened in 1990. it wads when she took the stand though. this is the star witness for the prosecution. she alleges she was assaulted they watched her, they listened to her. as she described exactly what she says happened to her. this is a case of credibility and the defense tries to undermine her credibility by trying to say her statements had
important that be canceled when it wads. we know we learned yesterday some members of the senate are frustrated. we had that two, three week carnival. since chairman nunes has rekiezed him of the fem i think we re back on track. we re scheduling hearings. so i do think we re back on track. i caught wind of everything that was tsds on the senate side. i mean, before you have oand many of them have to have hapb in chasifies spaces. this isn t something that can happen in a one or two week period.
who is on a kind of counter jihad. big low takes her point of view and shoots the torture scenes in a neutral way, they are ugly, disturbing and at the same time given what the film is about, they don t exactly make us want to go out and sign a petition against torture. they are sort of portrayed as ugly but necessary, and i think that s the central question. was it necessary? we know it s ugly. was it necessary? so, frank, same two questions to you. is the movie accurate and does it justify means as a justification because 69 ends. because you get the bad guy it s okay to torture somebody along the way. i don t think the movie makes the case. i don t think it wads into capturing obama i mean captured osama is worth torture but it does suggest very, very strongly without the torture we would never have been able to raid that compound, we would never have gotten there. this is a movie i think it s important to note the makers of it have said we took a very