INDEED.
He sure sounded like a paid government shill, to me. How about to you?
His comments were so dogmatic as to be virtually scripted hogwash. Redundant silly scripted hogwash. Stated like a vain mantra.
I loved it when Stanton handed him his head on a platter right off the bat.
Friedman certainly did lash out at him effectively.
But the questions Nye had are similar to the questions I have. For instance, one man there said he was told that a fellow airman saw a red UFO at the time the missiles went dark — where was the guy who actually saw it?
Nye was correct that the statement is hearsay; an out of court (in this case out of studio) statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted. King missed the point entirely - demanded to know if Nye thought the guest was lying. The guest could be telling the truth (that this is what he was told) but it is still hearsay.
Same with the other guest who claimed that “hundreds” of airman reported something similar. Where are they?
With no disrespect to the guests, though some of them claim to be “investigators” it is impossible to have any faith in their investigative abilities, or capacity for impartiality, based on their presentations. Of them all, Friedman appears the best credentialed — but this is also how he makes his living.
As I pointed out earlier, Larry King doesn't know how to cross-examine — the closest he came was in challenging Nye. That was pretty good. If he took that same approach with all his other guests then CNN would be closer to getting to the facts of this and other matters.
But then who would come on his show?