>> that's correct. i think there was a misimpression from the point that was just made before because they could still invoke the fifth amendment precisely because they could still face state prosecution. so the question is not whether by accepting a pardon they can no longer invoke the fifth amendment. it's the other pressure, the pressure precisely because they could face state prosecution. keep in mind just because someone might be pardoned for a past crime, but then later on they perjure themselves, and you have documents or other witnesses come forward, you can't pardon someone for a future crime. so the possibility that they are forced to testify either in court or in congress or in state court, pardons don't affect a future perjury. there is an important point in new york and in other states about the double jeopardy question. there are some states that extend a statute to protect against a second prosecution if the federal prosecutors have started a prosecution and not