Whereas Gerry Connell cut and pasted his argument together, creating a vast collage of disparate evidence, Saunders’ purpose was to transform this collection of unrelated bits and parts into a mosaic, a sweeping and well-defined picture of misguided government regulation and greedy, creamskimming opportunists such as McGowan. If Saunders tried to attack the government’s case on its own terms, if he responded to each of Connell’s anecdotes in isolation, his cause would fail. Besides, that wasn’t how Saunders saw the case. To him, U.S. v. AT&T was not confusing, or unwieldy, or even very
...more
