I don’t know, Jim. Their original claim is that he got them all stirred up by telling them a pack of lies. Proving he wasn’t lying is a legitimate defense without making an admission of anything. I think that’s why they abruptly changed their story last week. I still don’t think the story change covers things, and I think Durban trying to rule the question of the legitimacy of his audience’s outrage inadmissible is buying him a big dose of Streisand effect.
Make that Leahy.