Conyers to Goodling: Time to talk.

[babylonsister]

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/03/conyers-to-goodling-time-to-talk/

Conyers to Goodling: Time to talk.

“House Democrats on Tuesday asked a top Justice Department aide to come to Capitol Hill for a private interview in the next week on the firing of federal prosecutors. They said she cannot simply refuse to testify on the matter,” the AP reports. “Monica Goodling, who has said she would assert her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to avoid appearing at Senate hearings, must tell Congress which specific questions she’s refusing to answer, Democrats said in a letter to her lawyer.” Read the full letter at The Gavel, here:

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=207


http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/4684619.html
Dems seek to interview Gonzales aide

By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS Associated Press Writer
© 2007 The Associated Press


WASHINGTON — House Democrats on Tuesday asked a top Justice Department aide to come to Capitol Hill for a private interview in the next week on the firing of federal prosecutors. They said she cannot simply refuse to testify on the matter.

Monica Goodling, who has said she would assert her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination to avoid appearing at Senate hearings, must tell Congress which specific questions she's refusing to answer, Democrats said in a letter to her lawyer.

Goodling was senior counsel to embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and was the department's White House liaison before she took a leave earlier this month amid the uproar over the ouster of eight U.S. attorneys.

With Gonzales' credibility about his role in question and the White House now pushing to get him to Capitol Hill quickly to testify about it, lawmakers say Goodling's account could be crucial to their probe of the firings.

After she was subpoenaed by the Senate Judiciary Committee, her lawyer John Dowd told lawmakers last week that Goodling would not appear. He called the congressional investigation a perjury trap for his client and said she could be in "legal jeopardy" even if she testified truthfully.

"Her claims do not constitute a valid basis for invoking the privilege against self-incrimination," Reps. John Conyers of Michigan and Linda Sanchez of California wrote in a letter to Dowd Tuesday.

more...

[marmar]

1. These pigs are more or less admitting that they're liars, but refusing to testify....

because they'd be lying under oath and don't want to go to jail......How much more of this bullshit will Americans put up with? :shrug:

[Supersedeas]

11. so much for patriotism and defending the Constitution & laws of the US

[soothsayer]

2. cool, so is this because she must invoke the fifth on ALL questions

(that's the requirement---you can't pick and choose, answering some and pleading the fifth on the others), so they want to know which questions to put before her when she testifies?

[Dr.Phool]

7. She can't just refuse to testify. That's contempt.

She can only invoke the 5th to specific questions, where an honest answer would tend to incriminate her.

If she doesn't understand this, she ought to get a tuition refund from Pat Robertsons Regent University, because she got robbed.

[soothsayer]

9. but if you're going to invoke it at all, I think you have to invoke it

at every single question, otherwise you have waived your right or something. no?

[Dr.Phool]

10. No. Only questions that will incriminate you personally.

The 5th amendment is about SELF incrimination. If they ask her about Gonzo, Miers, et al, she has to answer truthfully. If she refuses to answer, it's contempt. If she lies, it's perjury.

Otherwise, no investigation would go anywhere, as anybody could refuse to testify.

[Bake]

12. In general practice, witnesses state their names and that's about it.

They take the Fifth to all other questions lest they be construed to have waived the privilege. And in practice, I have seen judges rule that the privilege HAS been waived by a witness who tried to "pick and choose" questions to answer or not answer. If I'm Goodling's lawyer, she doesn't answer a single question until a judge tells her to do so. It cannot be contempt of Congress to assert one's constitutional rights in good faith.

Now, the only question is whether she's asserting them in good faith ...

Bake, Esq.

[soothsayer]

16. that's what i thought. when i've seen it before, i was always

puzzled about why they took the fifth on EVERYTHING, and I think a commentator explained it was so they didn't waive their rights.

[tularetom]

3. Make her come and plead the fifth in front of God and everybody

It's one thing to say she's gonna do it it's another to actually do it right on CSPAN. If they subpoena her and she fails to appear they can have her ass thowed in jail for contempt of congress, no? I can't see where the dems have anything to lose by keeping the pressure on her.

[Bake]

14. Absolutely make her show up to assert the Fifth!

Swear her in, ask a few questions and get her on the RECORD (and CSPAN as well) taking the Fifth. There's a big difference between saying what you're going to do, and actually doint it. Plus, Congress could grant her immunity and then she'd have to testify fully and truthfully.

Bake

[Eurobabe]

4. Hoo-boy. Must stock up on popcorn now.

:popcorn:

the shit is going to hit the fan, majorly!

[Raven]

5. Right! She can't refuse to appear after a subpoena has issued

She can't take some sort of a global 5th. She must assert her right with each question. This much I know. What I don't know is whether there are any grounds on which to challenge her taking the 5th with respect to certain questions. Does anyone know the answer to that?

[soothsayer]

6. I think they're going to probe her a little and maybe scare her a bit

and then offer her immunity and then it's a slam dunk on alberto v05! or so i hope anyway.

[Fresh_Start]

8. I would think there are questions where she is not

in jeopardy so she can be compelled to answer. For example, did Alberto Gonzales attend a specific meeting.

[Bake]

15. One has to be extremely careful not to waive one's privilege.

Get her on the record asserting the Fifth to as many questions as necessary, and then make a determination about immunity, offer it, and get back to the testimony.

Bake, Esq.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

13. do you think she will suddenly go missing?