Why would anyone have Justin on a show? The guy is a moron or Scott wannabe. His spin on what he meant by pregnant women being crazy was stupid.
Well, you know how it is. Even the media types that we LIKE have to have something "out there" on their shows, to attract viewers, or so they seem to think.
What drives me nuts is that they feel they just HAVE to set up all these shows in terms of "this is the DEBATE tonight... see which side you want to root for." I get so darn sick of things like, "American beheaded in Iraq... what does this mean for America and where do you stand on this issue?" GIVE ME A BREAK! OBVIOUSLY, I "stand" on the side that screams, "This is horrible and I want to personally hunt down and kill each and every person who did this, in the most gruesome possible way." Duh!
So what they need to do, at least for this case, is just have a little, half-hour show--they don't have to run it every day, though I'd prefer that--about Trial News. (No, not "Trial Heat"--Trial NEWS.) On this little show, Beth Karas or someone from inside the courtroom would just show up and TELL us, "I heard the following testimony today, etc. I saw the following facial expressions on the faces of [witnesses, jury, defendant.] The judge said [fill in the blank.] Here are some photos of evidence. Here is a thumbnail sketch of each witness who testified today, in case you haven't heard of this person before."
Period! NEWS! Not a bunch of idiots arguing. We can have the bunch of idiots argue on other shows, for entertainment, but what we really want is an account of what we ourselves are blocked from seeing--the real thing, what actually was said and done in the courtroom.
As for Nancy having ol' Justin on, I guess the unspoken subtext for that (in my mind, at least) was something like, "Psst! Get a load of this guy! Can you believe there are actually people out there who are as vapid and loser-ish as this guy, and they are actually allowed to reproduce?"