So hasn't Monica already perjured herself today?

[Duer 157099]

When she was asked what law she thought she might have broken, which made her plead the 5th, she said it had to do with McNulty's testimony, about not providng info to him.

But, under Scott's questioning, she admits to having broken the law wrt hiring practices. Which CLEARLY is the real reason she took the 5th.

So, immunity is off the table Monica.

[tabasco]

1. Sure hope so. I want to see these anti-American crooks fry!

They have subverted our government from within and deserve the harshest punishments!

[Bitwit1234]

2. Another question I have - who can answer

Every single person questioned as of now, says, they had nothing to do with the firing of the attorneys.

Now this makes me wonder. Do we really have a "ghost" in the Justice Department. One who roams freely, meting out so called justice, making laws, firing people and hiring people. Someone that no one knows anything about. Where the written instructions mysteriously appear on the AG's desk each morning and he just follows along.

[Duer 157099]

6. See the film "Deja Vu" and you'll have your answer n/t

[Richard Steele]

10. Yes, and his name is Karl. He "roves" about freely, without let or hindrance...

...and the merest third-hand "suggestion" from him has more power
than all the laws of our nation combined.

Really quite something, innit?

[Fredda Weinberg]

3. Good try, but no dice

I understand your hostility, but Goodling's done a good job so far and if she can prove her allegations regarding McNulty, he's the one in legal jeopardy. For her testimony to be found perjury, it would have to be on a material issue - and the reason for invoking her constitutional rights won't cut it, not matter how far-fetched.

[WI_DEM]

4. yep, I agree.

[Duer 157099]

7. You're making my point

Yes, if she proves her allegation it is McNulty who is in legal jeopardy, so why need she take the 5th?

She took the 5th because of her illegal activies wrt hiring practice. But that was not the answer she gave. Why?

[Fredda Weinberg]

8. She may not have evidence if she briefed him verbally

In which case, her testimony today could become part of a "he said/she said" case and any contradictions, even innocent ones, could be used against her. Exactly the circumstances under which a grant of immunity is appropriate.

[malaise]

5. Any professional in any sphere

who tells me that she/he doesn't pay attention to 'the clock' is lying so yes.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

9. I'm assuming she's lying & McNulty was telling the truth.

In which case she should go to jail.