Mooney said the power to the elevator had been cut, not power to the building. Nor did he say that power to the phones had been cut.
And nobody argued that he did say that.
That is
exactly what Iacoletti tried to imply by including the reference to Mooney's testimony. Otherwise, why would he have brought it up?
And why would such an assumption be incorrect when you have a phone system with multiple lines, with calls coming in all the time?
Who said that calls were coming in "all the time?" For that matter, what is meant by "all the time" in the first place?
But even if there wasn't a constant stream of incoming calls, does that make it a normal occurrence that the phones went dead at exactly the moment the motorcade was passing by?
Who said the phones "went dead at exactly the moment the motorcade was passing by?" Hine didn't. She's not specific about how rapidly calls dropped of, or
exactly when they did (10 seconds before the motorcade arrived? One minute? Five minutes? Even 10? All of those can be contained in her description. Same with the amount of time it took for the calls to start coming back in, or the rate that they did.