- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 15,483
- Reaction score
- 8,227
- Location
- North Texas
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
The man who set up Hillary Clinton’s private email server will assert his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and refuse to answer questions over an open records lawsuit, according to court documents obtained Wednesday by Fox News.
Clinton IT aide Pagliano to plead Fifth in email case | Fox News
Why would he need to plead the fifth? He only set up a server as instructed by Hillary Clinton.
Is he pleading the fifth for Hillary?
You'd have to ask him those questions. You don't know the depth or breadth of what he's done. People plead the 5th all the time and often because answering questions in one investigation could implicate their involvement in an unrelated crime. Martin Shkreli is a recent and widely known example.
Certainly sounds suspicious. The initial request for a private server for a public service job, you know, the job order, would be an interesting read.Clinton IT aide Pagliano to plead Fifth in email case | Fox NewsWhy would he need to plead the fifth? He only set up a server as instructed by Hillary Clinton.Is he pleading the fifth for Hillary?
I think the OP is stating that pleading the 5th is a pretty clear confirmation that a crime was committed, either by Pagliano or by Clinton, or by both. He is also pointing out that Hillary is the one who would be accountable for the USE of such a server, not the person who installed the machine unless there was a contract which required a certain amount of security/encryption that was not fulfilled.
That's why our founders put the Fifth Amendment in our Constitution, to protect criminals, and not to protect those authorities who may abuse their power.
Amirite?
I can't tell if your response was meant to be sarcastic, but I read it that way.
The 5th amendment was meant to protect people from tyranny, in which coerced or forced testimony could wrongly convict a person. You are free to exercise this right, but it often comes across (rightly) as a dodge. Consider the following...
"You are not being accused of any crime, but we are interested in the server you provided for Mrs. Clinton which we believe she used inappropriately. Can you tell us the specifications of that server?"
"I plead the 5th."
With a pretty innocent question, pleading the fifth betrays a guilty conscience. The wording of the clause is "be a witness against himself". They are asking questions about Hillary, not about him, so being a witness against himself suggests that his answers would be incriminating.
Why would he need to plead the fifth? He only set up a server as instructed by Hillary Clinton.
Is he pleading the fifth for Hillary?
You'd have to ask him those questions. You don't know the depth or breadth of what he's done. People plead the 5th all the time and often because answering questions in one investigation could implicate their involvement in an unrelated crime. Martin Shkreli is a recent and widely known example.
Clinton IT aide Pagliano to plead Fifth in email case | Fox News
Why would he need to plead the fifth? He only set up a server as instructed by Hillary Clinton.
Is he pleading the fifth for Hillary?
If immunity comes with testifying, and now he's pleading the 5th, so I suppose his immunity will soon be rescinded?
I can only imagine that someone's squeezing his toes and making him plead the 5th, rescinding his immunity and exposing him to criminal charges.
I wonder who's squeezing his toes?
It's likely Pagliano was given "Queen for a Day" immunity from the FBI.
Anything he says after that could be used to prosecute him.
That type of immunity was used a lot in the Abramoff scandal.
I think the OP is stating that pleading the 5th is a pretty clear confirmation that a crime was committed, either by Pagliano or by Clinton, or by both. He is also pointing out that Hillary is the one who would be accountable for the USE of such a server, not the person who installed the machine unless there was a contract which required a certain amount of security/encryption that was not fulfilled.
I'm pointing out that the OP is just a hypothesis. Factually, only Pagliano and his attorney know why he invoked the 5th amendment. The rest is speculation or unsupported assumptions based on other unsupported assumptions at best. We don't even know if his fear of prosecution is centered around anything even related to the investigation.
If he were to go to trial for whatever reason, however, we are all also free to think, speculate, in whatever way we like about why one would be pleading the 5th.It's your constitutional right to plead the 5th whether you're innocent or guilty.
I'm pointing out that the OP is just a hypothesis. Factually, only Pagliano and his attorney know why he invoked the 5th amendment. The rest is speculation or unsupported assumptions based on other unsupported assumptions at best. We don't even know if his fear of prosecution is centered around anything even related to the investigation.
None of us know the full story, I agree. For instance, he may have a restraining order against him that would have prevented him from being on her premises which are too close to the house of some women he stalked, in which case his testimony could be used to show that he violated that arrangement. There are a whole host of possibilities... the vast of majority of which point to SOME wrongdoing.
If he were to go to trial for whatever reason, however, we are all also free to think, speculate, in whatever way we like about why one would be pleading the 5th.
You'd have to ask him those questions. You don't know the depth or breadth of what he's done. People plead the 5th all the time and often because answering questions in one investigation could implicate their involvement in an unrelated crime. Martin Shkreli is a recent and widely known example.
Is he pleading the fifth for Hillary?
People plead the 5th to avoid criminalizing themselves.
Innocent people tell the truth
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?