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.