I've watched him for years now and I saw the interview this morning on Fox News Sunday.
Clearly he and Chris Wallace were not on the same wavelength for pretty much the entire interview. It was almost surreal watching Chris Wallace ask one question with one intent and Jay Sekulow answer a different question with the intent of setting the legal argument before him.
Whether Wallace didn't understand that Sekulow was separating the legal argument from the political implications, or Sekulow didn't clearly communicate (until the end) that he was differentiating the political and legal argguments I'm still somewhat unsure myself.
Like I said, it seemed somewhat surreal that they were both so far off page from each other.
That's how I see it anyway. I'll have to go back and watch it again.
“Whether Wallace didn’t understand...”
You’re being very generous.
Wallace asked if Trump thought “Rosenstein has done anything wrong.” Sekulow answered, then went on with his “constitutional threshold question” hypothesis which includes the assumption of Trump being “under investigation”.
You say those words to any leftist and we are off to the races. Wallace was instantly unhinged and didn’t collect himself until the end of the interview.