I am betting that Monica Goodlin Can Fill In A Lot Of Gaps If Granted Immunity...

[Blackhatjack]

The question is how fearful she will be testifying truthfully against people who could make her disappear because of what she knows.

Hope they get a lot in her 'proffer' before they grant immunity, or she could suffer a terrible case of White House Amnesia.

[BlueManDude]

1. I don't trust her

[Jackpine Radical]

10. How can you not trust her?

She's a Regency Law grad, anointed by "Diamond Pat" Robertson and bathed in the blood of the lamb (an expression which I believe refers to some bizarre Christian ceremonial ritual).

[kestrel91316]

24. That's "washed" in the blood of the lamb.

Sounds rather pagan to me, but WTF do I know?

[mike_c]

2. she'll be a hostile and unwilling witness in any event...

...so even immunity will only be to the congress's advantage if they can figure out all the right questions to ask in advance, or if they have her for long enough to find all the leads she can offer and then follow them. I doubt that she'll be very forthcoming voluntarily.

[MadMaddie]

3. Since she is right smack in the middle of it - and their is no

doubt she actively participated in the firings....she better get while the getting is good because some other DOJ lackey will beat her to the punch and her ass is going to jail.....just sayin...

[democrat in Tallahassee]

4. Don't you understand, she serves god and bush; she is a loyal

bushie. None of these earthly things matter to her. She will go to jail if Jesus and Pat Robertson tell her to go to jail.

[woodsprite]

15. I thought lackeys in the admin thought they were one and the same. n/t

[Lint Head]

5. She is obviously a coward.

She went to a right wing university that supports the Iraq war. If she doesn't have the guts to join the armed forces and fight for her country, as the Bush twins should do, she doesn't have the guts to testify before a Congressional committee. :dem:

[napi21]

6. NOPE! I disagree. Remember she is a Grad of Regent, and

their motto is theremoval of the separation of Church and State, and the advancement of that world wide. She has risen to the level she has because of her complete loyalty to Shrub. Naw, she won't turn against her hero!

[Demeter]

7. By Definition She Can't Be Too Bright, or Educated

Her only hope is in being shrewd. She's been there long enough to have no illusions about the cult-ure! Perhaps she has a little bit of blackmail banked somewhere.

Still, I wouldn't want to be in her shoes.

[hang a left]

8. Actually according to this article she is seeking immunity...

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1609898,00.html?xid=rss-nation

They are debating whether or not to give it to her. It takes 3/4 committee vote to give it to her.

I agree with some of the posters up-thread. After she dissed the committee and put the WH talking points out there, I say let her ass fry.

But she is probably the only way to get to Rove and Abu. I know Gonzo is gonzo, so to speak but it sure would be nice to see him in a penitentiary.

[MADem]

9. I think she's a Bushbot idiot from a lousy law school who does not understand when one can take the

5th.

I swear, I really think the nitwit thinks she can take the 5th if she doesn't want to rat out a boss.

She went to Fundy Law School, after all. And no wonder we have an incompetent administration--there's over a hundred of her fellow alumni working in the Bush administation.

[Wiley50]

11. IF, with her lawyers, she is brave enough to take a deal

She will then try to Obfuscate her way out of this,
and keep her blood oath with the administration.

I really don't think she'll be able to pull it off
in the face of our, truly competent Inquisitioners, like Conyers

I teally don't think they'll let her try that gambit

She'll stay mute

[azureblue]

12. This will be easy

Just ask her to recite God's Ten Commandments, with emphasis on the "do not lie" part.
Then ask her to recite the Beatitudes- the teachings of Christ. Ask about the Golden Rule.
Then ask her if God & Jesus told her it is OK to lie? And what did Jesus teach about how to treat her fellow man?
Then ask her to tell what went on.

[spindrifter]

13. Don't forget--Monica is getting her

legal advice from a long-time criminal lawyer who is pretty savvy about what his client can and cannot do, so the miniscule amount of criminal and constitutional that she knows will be subsumed under his advice.
That being said, she will be portrayed as a young, vulnerable victim. Of course, the vulnerable victim will have lapses in her memory. And she "won't really re aware of what was going on" upstream and downstream from her. Please recall, Monica was one of those highly paid government employees who writes email sans capital letters and uses u for "you" and r for "are."

[hang a left]

14. And that brings up another question?

Who is footing the bill.

Is the guy pro bono?

[spindrifter]

16. Surely you jest!

Technically, she needs to be paying him, even if she does it by begging for donations on the internet like Libby did (through his support committee). If she isn't paying the dude, then his true client is whoever is footing the bill. Definitely a bias issue that could be used to discredit Ms. Goodling, I would say.

[hang a left]

18. Just seems to me that a high powered DC lawyer that charges

between 400-5000$ an hour and for this kind of case would demand at least at $10,000 retainer would be a lot for a UofPatRobertson grad.

[Blackhatjack]

17. I think you are reading this all wrong. Here is what I think is going on....

Her very skilled criminal defense lawyer knows that first in gets the best deal. Her career is over, and this is about trying to avoid prison.

She knows she is in trouble, and there are docs out there which will prevent her from evading criminal charges whether she testifies truthfully or not without immunity. Her lawyer has confirmed her worst fears that she is on her own, and she is facing prison. That tends to clarify one's options.

She knows what really went on in the White House, and that they will sacrifice her if it is necessary to protect Rove/Bush/Cheney.

So she makes a very sophomoric, and inaccurate claim of the right to invoke her 5th Amendment privilege to the Congressional Committees. What does that mean? Is she that incompetent?
I don't think so.

It was a way of communicating to the Congressional Committees that she 'wants to make a deal for immunity from prosecution', while at the same time appearing to the WHite House crew to be holding firm to the loyalty oath.

It is not so important that she testify publicly at this point. It is vitally important that she tell everything she knows, names all the names, and become an informed guide to all the White House direction and participation in this and other wrongdoing. If she does that, she will have earned her immunity, and if necessary she can testify publicly later if required. THis is exactly what Jack Abramoff has been doing. Abramoff has not appeared before any Congressional Committee under oath, but he has spilled crucial information about others involved.

I think as a trained lawyer she understands exactly what kind of peril surrounds her, and she is attempting to find a way out using what information she has to bargain with at the moment. If she delays too long, and other 'White House insiders' negotiate a deal first her bargaining power will go down substantially and she may be prosecuted fully to make an example of those who refuse to cooperate when caught redhanded.

Right now there must be a lot of distrust among those in the Administration who know the truth, wondering who can be trusted to remain quiet and who might turn the others in for personal gain.

[Demeter]

19. I Agree With Everything Except Two Words: Trained Lawyer

and because Monica isn't really a trained lawyer, she's gonna screw it up for herself. My only hope is she screws it up worse for Rove, Gonzo, Bush and Cheney before they put a permanent fix in place.

[hang a left]

22. Yes but she has a good lawyer.

Hopefully he is on "her" side and doesn't set her up for the others.

[KharmaTrain]

25. What Was Then...What Is Now

An excellent analysis!! Let me toss this little tidbit in, if I might...

When Goodling issued her intentions to take the 5th, she was still employed by Gonzo. The initial reaction was this was strange for someone inside the evil empire to run for the 5th so quickly when the corporate media hadn't yet determined if there was "smoke" in the USA firings. It was her run for the 5th that helped take this from a B to an A list story. That was then.

Then, she abruptly resigns...again hiding behind the 5th as she "departs the building". The timing again is suspect as one would suspect she didn't jump, she was pushed...and who and why. Using your scenario, methinks this is where the point of no return was reached...when she realized that she was on her own and that she was being thrown under the bus to protect the PTB upstream. I think this is when her attorney and Leahey's people started to talk some real turkey.

Now we have more and more evidence slowly dripping out that puts Goodling at ground zero of the USA firings...as well as Sampson...and we have a ton of contradictions in testimony only she can clear up. She's staring an obstruction charge if she sticks by her "saviors", if not perjury and violations of several other laws. She could roll up jail time that makes Scooter's look like he got a parking ticket. You bet this has to have been told to her and she wants to make a deal. If not, I hope she enjoys her prison ministry.

[Blackhatjack]

26. I think you have a prescient view of coming events --a few facts that support you view

THere is direct evidence that McNulty has 'alleged' he was not told the truth by Goodlin before he testified falsely before congress. There are emails that show she had the incriminating knowledge of the truth before briefing McNulty. It is a crime to engage in conduct that promotes a scheme to testify falsely before Congress.

IT is a fact that she was the liasion between DOJ and the WHite House. She looks around at who is going to be called to testify before Congress and realizes that the top planners and directors of this obviously improper use of power will not be testifying before Congress. Who is left? Sampson, already called to testify and already accused AG Gonzales of lying. She is next. Those remaining in the White House will use executive privilege arguments to delay and avoid testifying.

IF called to testify before Congress, she is cooked whether she tells the truth or lies. Lying brings on perjury charges ala Libby, and the WHite House has shown no hesitation to throw him under the bus to protect Bush/Rove/Cheney. They certainly would have no reason to stand up for her. If she tells the truth, other scandals will be revealed.

Her lawyer KNOWS the 5th Amendment gambit is not supported. It is all about rescuing her from this dilemma by obtaining immunity. When she invoked the 5th she definitely got 'pushed out' by the White House since they know what she knows, and know she is looking for a way out through immunity.

Not a known fact, but I think you have it exactly right --Goodlin's attorney is proffering what she can tell the Congressional Investigatory Committees in exchange for full immunity for everything she tells. THe Committee is hesitating because they suspect this is much bigger than the attorney firing scandal.

I see her being granted immunity and telling all, while publicly she is holding strong to invoking her 5th Amendment privilege. I do not see her testifying publicly any time soon since she is the Jack Abramoff of this scandal investigation --a guide to where the bodies are buried by one who knows.

The public perception and private truth are likely not to merge for some time. Hopefully, she will not have an accident or be subject to blackmail on some personal issue which would leave her with only one way out --go to prison for refusing to testify.

[mmonk]

20. The thing about many of these fundamentalist bush loyals

is they go by the addage the ends justify the means. It's a gamble either way.

[Blackhatjack]

21. There may be another misconception about her being a Regent Law School Grad...

The MultiState portion of the bar exam administered in each State is exactly the same. In order to pass the bar exam in any state, you have to pass the multiState multiple choice section. So if she is licensed by a State Bar to practice law, she had to have at least the minimum knowledge necessary to pass this portion of the bar exam. I can assure you that you knows and understands exactly what is required to invoke the 5th Amendment Privilege, even though the release by her very able Defense Lawyer would indicate neither of them knows the law on this.

Another point... I have found nothing that indicates she is not a 'true believer' when it comes to mixing her religion and her loyalty to the Bush Administration. When forced to choose between her loyalty and telling the truth under oath, she is in a real dilemma. She most likely fully understands she has engaged in wrongdoing, but she still considers herself to be following her 'Christian ideals.' I think this is all about her avoiding having to 'tell the truth under oath.' If she is a 'true believer' I think she might refuse to testify and go to jail rather than testify, as her only way to reconcile both of these positions which she is committed to that obviously conflict with one another.

Just my opinion.

[kestrel91316]

23. She's a Regent U. fundie whacko, and probably worships Bush as

the Second Coming of Christ. There is NO WAY IN HELL she will EVER spill the beans on this bunch. She'd rather go down in history as a martyr to the holy cause than turn on Bushco.

Note: This is my OPINION. I have no links.

[spanone]

27. She's working for God and pat robertson. Don't trust her for one second.