Skip to content

Lawyer Up

May 17, 2013

I was hoping that listening to Steven Miller this morning as he testified in front of Congress would put me back to sleep. No such luck.  The commentators kept breaking in and saying how he was stonewalling the questions.

(As an aside, listening to Steve Miller in the morning usually wakes me up, since he’s a killer guitar player.  I felt that needed to be said.)

Honestly, though… the guy is under oath with an IG sitting next to him that has in-depth details of the report.  The way the two answered questions bespeaks their individual roles.  Mr. Miller is a guy who could say something even slightly wrong and get hauled back for another round, AND busted for perjury.  Of course he’s not going to remember all the details.

I’ve never been deposed, but I’ve gone through a fair amount of legal training.  You do not give specifics of something that you do not precisely remember.  If you don’t know, you say you don’t know.  If you think you know, but you’re not sure, you say you don’t know.  When it’s your butt on the line, it’s very likely that any altruism goes out the window.

Now, that said… Mr. Miller knew the line of questions he’d be asked, and he didn’t come prepared with any detail?  Hmmm.  That sounds to me like a person who’s not interested in actually providing information to help the case move forward.

I had to stop listening to the testimony and come to work, so I can’t come to any conclusions.  It just seems consistent to me that this guy isn’t going to provide any relevant info, which will inflame once side and prove a point to the other.

2 Comments leave one →
  1. May 17, 2013 9:03 am

    I’ve been deposed (including video depositions) for many days, and spent weeks in a witness stand. It is intense indeed.

    Your notion of strategy is a fair one, it seems to me. But “I don’t know” is itself a form of perjury when it can be demonstrated that you do know — so he must be careful indeed.

    Of course, if he were instructed: “Hey, I want my administration to be transparent, and I’d really like to find the problem and fix it” this story would be entirely different. Instead, he must protect his chain of command, most particularly President Obama. So, he cannot be forthcoming, as the truth will not serve that purpose.

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

    • May 17, 2013 9:58 am

      Absolutely agree with that last point. You were more eloquent in making it than I was.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: