[Quick Shot]

I must question the “waiving” of a constitutional right. It was something we were born with. One does not give it up. She obviously handled it clumsy but she will all ways have it.

I picture the case (not necessarily here) but one is testifying in court about some matter, the questions change to your own guilt, one can take the 5th at that point even though one answered the earlier questions.

[SeaHawkFan]

When that happens, the judge will inform the jury that they free to assume the an answer would be adverse to the interests of the witness.

IOW, all implications must be made in favor the questioner.

[tomkat]

It's my understanding that one has an unassailable right against self-incrimination via the 5th Amendment.

It's also my understanding that once a witness takes the stand and makes any statement as to the facts, as LL effectively did via her self-serving screed, that witness becomes legally subject to cross-examination.

And while they may subsequently assert their rights under the 5th at each subsequent question, such assertion does not excuse them until such time as the questioner rests, or they're dismissed via judicial pronouncement.

[blueunicorn6]

Not only did she testify about how innocent she is, she also took a shot at the committee and then tried to go Fifth Amendment. She was coached to do that.

[PA-RIVER]

Federal law is unforgiving. If she refuses to testify, that’s contempt of congress.

Jail. Time.