the truth

Dessie 2022-04-19 09:02:35

A man left his family and went to prison for a principle
and a holiday was named after him

A man left his children to fight
and a statue was erected for him

Now a woman does the same but she Despised by the world

===================================

In the end, when the Special Prosecutor charged with unbelievable charges, in the democratic When she was thrown into prison under the halo of justice. I really wonder what kind of mental powers allow such a person to sleep peacefully at night without being tormented by guilt.

Also at the end, when TIMMY said that his father said that you have several opportunities to come out, I was also entangled in what way this child would go with such a selfish father.

==================================

Well, in fact, I am not a strong person at all when I
see such a woman I admire it immensely.
Naturally, this also has the artistry of the movie. I
still have to believe in the beauty of human nature. For

example, when ALBERT appeared, he
paid more attention to the clothes and the parties. I hated it very much,
but with the development of the plot, he gradually changed from a disgusting one. The little old man
has transformed into an admirable and good lawyer.
Although his role is not much, he is
still a veteran actor with good acting skills

========================= ========

In addition, the ending and the beginning are gorgeous and often silent

. In fact, if the little girl realizes that she killed her mother
, she will understand the tragedy one day~~

View more about Nothing But the Truth reviews

Extended Reading
  • Beth 2022-04-24 07:01:17

    Five stars at the end. "i realized that with great people, there's no difference between principle and the person." .

  • Pink 2022-03-27 09:01:14

    Unexpected ending. But nasty Rachel husband David Schwimmer (ROSS) is also in it.

Nothing But the Truth quotes

  • Ray Armstrong: [staring at his wife's new story] You made the top page!

  • Alan Burnside: [In front of the Supreme Court] In 1972 in Branzburg v. Hayes this Court ruled against the right of reporters to withhold the names of their sources before a grand jury, and it gave the power to the Government to imprison those reporters who did. It was a 5-4 decision, close. In his dissent in Branzburg, Justice Stewart said, 'As the years pass, power of Government becomes more and more pervasive. Those in power,' he said, 'whatever their politics, want only to perpetuate it, and the people are the victims.' Well, the years have passed, and that power is pervasive. Mrs. Armstrong could have buckled to the demands of the Government; she could've abandoned her promise of confidentiality; she could've simply gone home to her family. But to do so, would mean that no source would ever speak to her again, and no source would ever speak to her newspaper again. And then tomorrow when we lock up journalists from other newspapers we'll make those publications irrelevant as well, and thus we'll make the First Amendment irrelevant. And then how will we know if a President has covered up crimes or if an army officer has condoned torture? We as a nation will no longer be able to hold those in power accountable to those whom they have power over. And what then is the nature of Government when it has no fear of accountability? We should shudder at the thought. Imprisoning journalists? That's for other countries; that's for countries who fear their citizens - not countries that cherish and protect them. Some time ago, I began to feel the personal, human pressure on Rachel Armstrong and I told her that I was there to represent her and not her principle. And it was not until I met her that I realized that with great people there's no difference between principle and the person.