But really why would they do that... You do realize making the case for DJT being innocent doesn't involve painting other different people as guilty? That's not how law (trials, courts etc) works.

Like it's DJT's impeachment case, not AOC's or Olberman's. As comparison, you can't convince a jury that a man didn't rob a store by bringing attention to the fact that his next door neighbors are serial killers and pedophiles -- because that's unrelated to whether or not he's innocent/guilty of robbing a store. Right?

As a lawyer myself, this much I can tell you: if during DJT's impeachment case his lawyers find the time to start talking about AOC or Olberman that's a very bad sign and a red flag. It's a sign that they don't have anything to say or add about DJT. They would be ignoring the defendant. They would be wasting anyone's time.

But really why would they do that... You do realize making the case for DJT being innocent doesn't involve painting other different people as guilty?

Like it's DJT's impeachment case, not AOC's or Olberman's.

As comparison, you can't convince a jury that a man didn't rob a store by bringing attention to the fact that his next door neighbors are serial killers and pedophiles -- because that's unrelated to whether or not he's innocent/guilty of robbing a store. Right?

As a lawyer myself, this much I can tell you: if during DJT's impeachment case his lawyers find the time to start talking about AOC or Olberman that's a very bad sign and a red flag. It's a sign that they don't have anything to say or add about DJT. They would be ignoring the defendant. They would be wasting anyone's time.