Posted on 06/01/2016 4:06:40 PM PDT by chuck allen
WHy? How about “how?” Isn’t he compelled to testify once he has immunity?
Because its the Clinton Crime Syndicate.
“Some of my best friends are Clinton Americans”
He knows what the clintonistas do to snitches.
He was never going to testify. The DOJ is working overtime to keep him quiet.
This is a civil case, led by Judicial Watch. The Justice department has nothing to do with it, and I doubt if they can, or will attempt to compel him to testify.
The immunity deal may only apply to the DOJ/FBI.
“Take the 5th” is what Donald needs to call any one related to a Clintooon.
Good point, I overlooked that.
Yes, I’ve been corrected. Sorry.
Pagliano got immunity to testify in front of the FBI; he's pleading the 5th when it comes to testifying in the Judicial Watch civil suit.
All of this is because CONGRESS REFUSES TO DO THEIR JOB!!
Congress has ALL the power in washington, the executive and judicial branch operate according to the whims of CONGRESS!
“U.S. CODE
TITLE 2—THE CONGRESS
CHAPTER 6—CONGRESSIONAL AND COMMITTEE PROCEDURE; INVESTIGATIONS
Sec. 193. Privilege of witnesses
No witness is privileged to refuse to testify to any fact, or to produce any paper, respecting which he shall be examined by either House of Congress, or by any joint committee established by a joint or concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, or by any committee of either House, upon the ground that his testimony to such fact or his production of such paper may tend to disgrace him or otherwise render him infamous.”
Simply look up Hinds Precedents, especially chapters 53 and 51, and Cannon’s Precedents, especially chapters 184-185. You’ll find numerous detailed cases of Congress asserting its power, arresting people, holding them until they agreed to answer questions, and then releasing them. Some of these people did not refuse to appear, but simply failed to satisfactorily answer questions. One has to wonder how a previous Congress might have responded to Alberto Gonzales’s endless recitations of “I do not recall.”
Congress can Remove the President
Congress can remove the head of every executive agency Congress can remove ALL of their employees
Congress can Abolish every agency they so choose
Congress can remove EVERY JUDGE IN AMERICA, including every supreme court justice.
Congress can abolish every federal court except the supreme Court
Congress can decide which cases the Judicial Branch can hear and decide
CONGRESS can Imprison ANYONE they want for any reason they so desire for as long as they wish.
Congress can declare WAR
No other governing body has even 10% of the power CONGRESS has!!
CONGRESS IS ALLOWING ALL OF IT!!!
Congress has the authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt. The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
If found in Contempt the person can be arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President of the Senate, by the respective Sergeant at Arms.
Statutory criminal contempt is an alternative to inherent contempt.
Under the inherent contempt power Congress may imprison a person for a specific period of time or an indefinite period of time, except a person imprisoned by the House of Representatives may not be imprisoned beyond adjournment of a session of Congress.
Imprisonment may be coercive or punitive.
Some references
[1] Joseph Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842 http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_5s21.html
[2] Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 - “And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.” http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/204/case.html
[3] Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/125/case.html 73rd Cong., 78 Cong. Rec. 2410 (1934) https://archive.org/details/congressionalrec78aunit
[4] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 - Under a warrant issued by the President of the Senate the Deputy to the Senate Sergeant at Arms arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, Mally S. Daugherty, who had been twice subpoenaed by the Senate and twice failed to appear. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/273/135/case.html
[5] Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule IV Duties of the Sergeant at Arms - [] execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the Speaker. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/pdf/HMAN-105-pg348.pdf
[6] An analysis of Congressional inquiry, subpoena, and enforcement http://www.constitutionproject.org/documents/when-congress-comes-calling-a-primer-on-the-principles-practices-and-pragmatics-of-legislative-inquiry/
In 1857, a New York Times reporter refused to say which members of Congress had asked him to get them bribes (protecting his “sources” just as various Judith Millers today protect the people who feed them proven lies that costs thousands of lives), so Congress locked him up until he answered and then banned him from Congress.
In 1924 an oil executive appeared but refused to answer certain questions, so the Senate held — literally held — him in contempt. Senator Thomas Walsh of Montana argued that this question of contempt was of the gravest importance, and that it involved “the very life of the effective existence of the House of Representatives of the United States and of the Senate of the United States.” The matter was taken to court, and the witness fined and imprisoned.
Because he wants to continue breathing.
I bet the FBI gave him immunity through a proffer letter — otherwise known as “Queen for a Day” immunity.
By "abuse" what they mean is a vid of him repeatedly invoking the phrase "incriminate myself of criminal activity" or somesuch. I can't imagine that being posted to the Internet on an infinite loop on a conservative website with a soundtrack of "I fought the law and the law won" or anything like that. That would be wrong.
Because he knows the government lawyers are a bunch of slimy liars and that cops/prosecution can lie all they want to the suspect?
Aren’t witnesses who plead the 5th in a civil trial subject to jail time and fines due to being in contempt? This scumbag is willing to go to jail for hildebeast.
Although the actual wording of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says a person shall not be “… compelled in any *criminal* case to be a witness against himself”, the right has been found applicable to civil actions as well. Natural persons in danger of facing criminal charges do not have to testify, answer interrogatories or produce documents about matters potentially incriminating to them.
A deposition is testimony. So is he in danger of facing criminal charges? Not unless he violates the terms of his immunity agreement with the Justus Department.
So it looks like Hillary is trying to have it both ways: hang it on Pagliano, “Why, I didn’t even know to have a password!” But wait—he’s got immunity.
Why...... he wants to continue to live
Judicial Watch can’t compel anybody to do anything.
When the Clintons go to trial, in legitimate Article III court, yes, if Pagliano has been granted immunity by the government, he can be compelled to testify.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.