These things don’t happen by accident. Surely her counsel knows the law. And knew that the Republicans have a former prosecutor on their committee so they wouldn’t miss it either. So she took this big risk to just be able to say she’s innocent under oath, when she could just as easily announced it on the steps of the Capitol a few minutes later? Unlikely.
More likely:
1. She’s aware of the law, and it doesn’t force her to keep answering questions; or
2. It’s a setup. She wanted the committee to say “now we’ve got you. stay right there. answer these questions or we’ll throw you in jail for contempt of Congress!!” and to be seen to be beating up on her and denying her her rights. It could have been a long-shot attempt to provoke a scene that she could later claim was “reminiscent of McCathyism”. Remember that this was the woman who staged the whole setup Q&A where she just ‘suddenly’ admitted something that would be coming out in the IG report a few days later.
I don’t think these things happen by accident and I don’t think there’s anything to be gained by dragging her back. Much better to focus on getting all the emails.
When a setup is planned in the context of lying, sometimes it can be defeated in a counterattack. Such a time is when your opponents have reached the point of smothering themselves with their own lies.
All that has to be done is expose the truth.
McCarthyism? With the right amount of guts and some wit, anyone could show with a few well placed words that accusations of “McCarthyism” are themselves reminiscent of McCarthyism. Believe me, it wouldn’t be difficult.