No problem with editing for accuracy, or even deletions to avoid getting the witness into avoidable hot water. That's not the kind of editing I was referring to. But what would you say if the edits changed a date, for example, to make the statement into an outright lie! If the President and Cohen, at that time, shared attorneys, was there any insertion, or changing of substantive facts. If so, did the change or insertion originate with Client #1 or Client #2? It could not have ethically originated, if substantive, with the Attorneys.I would disagree. Having attorneys edit testimony for dates, timeline, and content seems to be a common thing in Congressional testimony. It is a normal practice to have your testimony reviewed before giving it -- the bottom line is that YOU will be responsible for any false statements under oath -- not any legal advisors involved in the preparation.
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."
Last edited: