Could you help me understand what I did not get on a commentary by Youtube of an episode of Suits? (follows transcript if you click)

- “One night he says that if I sleep with him he’s gonna take care of me in the firm and if I don’t he’s gonna fire me.
– So what did you do?
– I went to human resources. They said they investigated, couldn’t find anything to support my claim. I wasn’t looking for a payoff. All I wanted was for it to stop. Can you help me?
...
Okay, here’s why this doesn’t make any sense. They’re hinting that the other side hired a witness to testify that the defendant sexually harassed her in some sort of quid pro quo sexual harassment, and then she was going to basically purger herself and admit to not being truthful about a prior crime when she was 17. That doesn’t make any sense because her testimony is still on the record. She testified that he sexually harassed her. So they hired someone to provide evidence for the other side. Now true, they might have to deal with the fallout of her being shown to be not the most trustworthy person but that testimony is still on the record. They hired someone, they paid someone, to give horrible testimony about the defendant. They’re not even witness tampering right, it’s crazy.
...
– But, again, she falsely testified against the people that hired her. That’s not even the way you’d wanna witness tamper. They paid someone to give testimony against themselves. It’s totally insane.”

That transcripted, I haven’t understood a thing. I really want to stress, you mustn’t explain to me in layman terms, you must explain to me in profane terms. Okay? Don’t really spare on details, just explain to me so I can understand.