Passage Summary: A lawyer claims a boss couldn't have wanted a project to fail because she hired the best people for the job, so the witness who said she wanted it to fail must be lying.

Conclusion: The witness committed perjury when claiming that Congleton intended for the project to fail.

Reasoning: Congleton assigned the highest quality staff, including the best artists and writers, to work on the project.

Analysis: The lawyer is making a massive leap from external actions to internal intent. It is entirely possible for someone to hire great people while still secretly hoping for a disaster, perhaps to maintain appearances or because they were forced to by a superior. This is an 'EXCEPT' question, so four choices will correctly identify flaws—such as confusing 'top-notch' individuals with a 'top-notch' team or assuming that hiring well guarantees a desire for success. The lawyer is being quite the bully here, assuming that professional behavior perfectly mirrors one's private heart.