Very true... He was under oath, so it was important for him to choose his words wisely.
Originally Posted by pbrauer
What I found interesting was his answer to the question:
CONNOLLY: And your testimony, to be very clear, in response to Mr. Jordan's question, is that you've -- you've never had any conversation with respect to this subject, the subject of this hearing, with anybody at the White House, though you were at the White House 118 times? Now, that -
SHULMAN: Yeah, I mean, just so I'm -- just so I'm clear, I have no memory. Wouldn't have been appropriate. Would not have been appropriate to have a conversation with the White -- with anyone at the White House about the subject of discriminating against conservative groups in any part of our operation.
If he never had any such conversation with anyone at the White House as he implies, why didn't he simply answer "No sir, I didn't"? Him instead saying such a conversation "Wouldn't have been appropriate" is not a denial, but gives the impression it is... Therefore, if it is discovered he did have such a conversation, he can't be charged with lying to congress.
His testimony tells me that he did have such conversations on the subject with members of the Administration, otherwise his answers would have been more direct and forthcoming.