Waxman/Leahy should give Monica Goodling immunity to testify

Cheney Killed Bambi

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 06:51 PM
Original message

Waxman/Leahy should give Monica Goodling immunity to testify

She's a small fish. But she can testify about the big fish. And one would imagine those fish are quite big, since her job title is DOJ White House Liason. So, Waxman and Leahy should give her immunity so she can testify truthfully under oath about what went down.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Junkdrawer

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 06:54 PM
Response to Original message

1. Immunity from perjury? Because if you do, she'll spin a series of lies...

exonerating Gonzales, Rove and Myers...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

originalpckelly

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #1

9. No, immunity from any criminal activity she may have been involved in...

and Waxman's not a prosecutor, so the idea is moot.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Cheney Killed Bambi

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #1

11. No immunity from perjury

When you're granted immunity, you still have to testify truthfully under oath, or you'll be guilty of perjury. You just can't be prosecuted for the things you testified about under oath. If you are chomping at the bit to see Goodling go to prison, then you don't want to give her immunity. But if you want to gather evidence against Rove, Miers, Gonzalez, etc., then you want to give her immunity.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Richard Steele

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 06:54 PM
Response to Original message

2. Nope. Congress made that mistake back during Iran/Contra.

Let's hope they LEARNED from that bungle.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

catmandu57

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #2

16. I hope they have too

Iran/Contra still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, if it had been done right there's a good chance that poppy would have been the last bush we would have had to worry about.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MannyGoldstein

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 06:54 PM
Response to Original message

3. And Put Her Under Serious Guard 24/7/365

BFEE don't play nice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

whistle

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 06:54 PM
Response to Original message

4. "Are you now, or have you ever been a Christian Fascist?"

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

in_cog_ni_to

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 06:54 PM
Response to Original message

5. She would just lie. She's one of them. "A good Bushie."

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Jackpine Radical

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #5

6. They're gonna have some of the goods on her.

She isn't gonna know what they have from other sources (e.g. the emails themselves). She won't know what she can get away with lying about. She's walking in quicksand. She will have less to lose from telling the truth than from lying, because her immunity can be rescinded if she's caught lying.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Justice Is Comin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:03 PM
Response to Original message

7. You can cook her like a microwave--

from the inside, out.

I'm betting Kyle Sampson will be the start of her gargantuan problems and legal bills.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Warren Stupidity

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:14 PM
Response to Original message

8. No No No No No No No: see Ollie North.

Bad idea. Iran Contra.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Gabi Hayes

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #8

10. the only bad idea was having to try it where they did. the three man court of

appeals to which the verdict went consisted of two Reagan appointees who are/were as corrupt as the day is long

one of them was Lawrence Silberman, of all people.

the verdict was overturned by the two crook judges. the other, honest one, voted to uphold

just another reason why we're so screwed: appointment of not just right wing, but FASCIST judges at all federal levels

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Warren Stupidity

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #10

12. As you note -

one fascist judge after another has been appointed to the federal courts since then.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cali

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:30 PM
Response to Original message

13. You know, I think I'll happily refrain from giving advice to Leahy

and Waxman and Conyers. All three have been in Congress for a very long time, and though I don't know the legal backgrounds of the others, Leahy was an experienced prosecutor prior to being elected to the Senate. And he was one of the key Senators in the Iran-Contra mess. I'll bet he learned a lot from that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Cheney Killed Bambi

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #13

14. True

I bet they grant her immunity. But if they don't, I will definitely respect their decision.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PhilipShore

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Mar-26-07 07:40 PM
Response to Original message

15. No immunity...

a deal, would give her a "license" to lie her way out of it, which she would. Unless, her lawyers first say under oath -- in public hearings that her testimony, more then likely would bring "charges" against some big fish above her.

I am not a lawyer, perhaps lawyers might know of a better tactic.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sun May 05th 2024, 02:10 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.