This is an excellent point and explains the confusion of ALL of NYT’s reporters.

Moore, the CNN legal analyst, defended Blanche’s approach of mixing up the evidential timeline to try to shake Cohen’s pre-trial prep. “You want to make them tell the story on your terms and not to follow the script,” Moore said.—Michael Moore, a former US attorney for the Middle District of Georgia

Several times I took a non-linear approach in deposition. Once in a murder case I was defending, I started at the end of the lead detective's investigation. It confused counsel for the co-defendant who lashed out at me on the record. But--unintentionally--it so threw off the lead that I got an answer that won a motion to suppress. The difference is I did it in deposition not on cross-examination in front of a jury. Todd Blanche confused even the erudite Times' reporters. No doubt, he confused the jury also.

There is something lawyers can do about that, too. Many times in trial you have an easel or chalk board to display exhibits. Lawyers use them to write things for emphasis, too. As prosecutor and as defense attorney, when I got a particularly helpful answer, I would write the thing right on the fucking easel. Big black magic marker. Underline it. "That's what you just said, right?" If you take a non-linear approach to cross, you have got to do something like that to avoid losing the jury.