with me isjohn edward jones. with me isjohn edward jones iii. he is a former us federaljudge and president of the dickinson college in pennsylvania. the opening statements are something like an overture. they set out a road map. what did you make of the two sides and the way they set out their arguments? two sides and the way they set out theirarguments? tt two sides and the way they set out their arguments?— two sides and the way they set out their arguments? it was exactly as i thou . ht it their arguments? it was exactly as i thought it would _ their arguments? it was exactly as i thought it would be. _ their arguments? it was exactly as i thought it would be. it _ their arguments? it was exactly as i thought it would be. it is _ their arguments? it was exactly as i thought it would be. it is a - their arguments? it was exactly as i thought it would be. it is a road - thought it would be. it is a road map _ thought it would be. it is a road map from _ thought it would be. it is a road map. from the prosecution standpoint, what we know is that the linchpin _ standpoint, what we know is that the linchpin of— standpoint, what we know is that the linchpin of their case is probably michael— linchpin of their case is probably michael cohen. they admit that he is not the _ michael cohen. they admit that he is not the best witness in the world but it _ not the best witness in the world but it seems they have got other witnesses — but it seems they have got other witnesses who will buttress or corroborate his testimony. from the defence _ corroborate his testimony. from the defence perspective, what they did was trivialise the case and basically say this is a case that shouldn't— basically say this is a case that shouldn't have been brought. so what we don't _ shouldn't have been brought. so what we don't know about some of the other— we don't know about some of the other witness testimony, some folks who worked for the former president and what _ who worked for the former president and what they might say, and of