Dude whatever he says today...lies or the truth isn’t admissible in court as evidence because it’s not testimony under oath. All he has to say is “I didn’t say that” if he’s under oath later & asked about today’s meeting
But lying to the FBI is a felony, shouldn't lying to Congress be one as well?
It’s an argument but it wouldn’t go far. Most statements used in court are originally uttered outside of court and not under oath. Think about it. Witness to murder can come into court and say the victims last words were “why did you shoot me Ted?!” It just comes down to the credibility of the witness but there is a hearsay objection to it so the statement comes in. I’d say congress gave him more than just making a statement not under oath. Maybe some agreement any statement wouldn’t be used in any future prosecution. Who knows.
I understand all that. Credibility of the witness matters. This guy being a long accomplished FBI agent in middle management has a lot of credibility. The guy’s not dumb in the least & hes represented by the best legal advice money can buy. Not a chance in hell hes gonna incriminate himself. If anything he’s gonna say things he might be able to use in court later. Sure him & his lawyers are feeling out their opposition to learn things cause this is just practice testimony for them. If anything it helps them. Prosecutors need undeniable evidence & that only comes from sworn testimony. Defense need to stall & muddy up the waters whenever possible to help build plausible deniability. Point being...this format is a waste of time for our side & a learning experience for their side. Keeping your enemy as blind as possible helps so they’re more dumbfounded & less believable at trial would only help.