testimony and we wouldn t be able to use that evidence effectively if we couldn t cross examine him live on the stand. michael and gordon proposed an unorthodox solution. after freeman s testimony was read into the record, they would cross examine the empty witness chair as if freeman was on the stand. we took the evidence of the lies and put them into the form of questions. you told the jury you didn t know that john thompson was going to rob someone. isn t it true, however, that you sat out to rob someone. silence hung in the air after each question was posed giving the jury time to imagine freeman s response. you suggested in your testimony that you stole nothing from mr. liuzza at all. but you admitted you stole all of mr. liuzza s property, didn t you? we asked a series of questions culminating in the final one, isn t it true, mr. freeman, that you and you alone
no. would u.s. strikes achieve a significant goal for the you sat? 72% of americans say no, they don t believe the president can do something in a limited way, make a positive difference and walk away without getting the united states locked in to a costly quagmire. that right there, that skepticism carol is the president s biggest challenge this week, even people who support him personally are very skeptical he has a plan to do this in a short, limited way and make things better. so what if the president loses? what are his options? as i noted he could launch strikes anyway. he says he reserves that constitutional authority, but if you look at our poll numbers, pretty convincing political opinion here in the united states he should not do that. he could wait for the united nation, the administration beyond frustrated they could get any progress through the u.n. or the president could decide to act in some other way increasing humanitarian aid or weapons aid. if you ask the white house
just moments ago white house press secretary jay carney finished the administration s pushback on the latest controversy regarding benghazi. the question of its involvement in crafting the initial post-attack talking points. here s a sample. all of this information was provided months ago to members of congress. a fact that we made clear to all of you at the time. during the confirmation process for john brennan as director of the cia. joining us now eleanor holmes norton, washington, d.c. s, representative in the congress. welcome, ma am. thank you. you sat on wednesday s benghazi hearing. you ve heard today s reports on the talking points. have you heard anything at all this week that makes you believe the administration, the president, has been involved in some kind of major cover-up? they got nowhere near the administration. they got near the military who made the decision. there should be a second plane
some seven figures. it is hard for them to make he was complaining about how hard it was to get something funny out of a debate. if you sat on twitter during the debate, i was laughing throughout the whole thing. there are people who don t get paid that making great jokes. the only logical i can think of is the debate was so ripe for jokes that you would feel like you were plagiarizing almost. somebody was doing something funny and you were transcribing. if somebody paid you a million dollars you would find a way to do it. a million? i don t think they get millions. well, jim downy does. you shouldn t say who is making what. well, he has been there forever. i assume he makes a lot of money. he has been there since the 1970s. i find it hard to believe they couldn t find a lot of deb. i think they are all one ups. twitter is like 140 characters. a snarky line does not sketch mate. the lead writer was conservative. so he is having a legitimate problem finding it. there
people of egypt deserve the fate of south africa, that place is terrible right now. it has failed its people, and she thinks their constitution is a good model and america is not? america s constitution has served its people well for more than 200 years. south africa has failed its people. megyn: it does seem she s very focused on human rights, and, you know, this is a big debate. it s not the right-leaning justices on the high court don t believe in human rights, but the criticism of some of the leftist judges, leslie s that they think everything is a fundamental right, everything as opposed to just leaving it to the state legislatures or lawmakers to decide, okay, this is the right decision. they leave it to nine justices wearing black robes to tell us what our rights are and what they aren t. you know, not every christian who reads the bible believes every word of the bible or would have arguments or questions about it and its interpretation. much with our justices, i believe, if