4 ms·
I've lived through an IG investigation. You generally only want to respond in writing so you give a correct and complete answer instead of misspeaking and havin
by caseysoftware 7y ago
I've lived through an IG investigation. You generally only want to respond in writing so you give a correct and complete answer instead of misspeaking and having it used against you, your project, or agency later on.
It doesn't hold the legal consequences of screwing up an FBI interview but can be devastating professionally.
- IAmEveryone 7y agoDid you miss the quote literally starting this (sub)thread? Senior Defense Department officials were barred from answering questions on the subject during interviews
- ceejayoz 7y ago> you give a correct and complete answer The article asserts no answer; that they were forbidden to answer those questions. Written or otherwise.
- beerandt 7y ago>barred from answering questions on the subject during interviews
- ceejayoz 7y agoThere's such a thing as a written interview. There's no indication they answered the questions in a written form; it appears quite clear the White House asserted privilege, which would apply to any form of questioning.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- beerandt 6y agoIf "during interviews" was meant to cover any form of questioning then the sentence is obviously and improperly redundant. >barred from answering questions on the subject during interviews. vs >barred from answering questions on the subject when asked questions on the subject. vs >barred from answering questions on the subject. It's a limiting modifier phrase, so the default is to assume it was meant to modify the meaning.
- ceejayoz 6y agoYou can read the report, if you like. It indicates the WH claimed privilege. Privilege applies to the questions/answers, not the medium in which they’re asked.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- crazygringo 7y agoBut they were interviewed. So unless you can show that the questions they were barred from answering on the subject during their interviews were, in fact, responded to in writing later (which I haven't heard of happening)... then the distinction you're drawing doesn't seem to be relevant here, right?