Posted on 06/22/2016 11:27:56 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
“I think he’s afraid he may get fitted for a new pair of concrete shoes from the Clinton mail order catalog.”
I hope he dies at the hands of the Clintons. He’s a traitor to his country so any way he leaves Earth early will be a good thing.
Do we know if he’s a defendant in the civil suit? I mean, if he has no potential financial liability then why not take the fifth and avoid any risk...other than running afoul of the judge?
(I’m not a lawyer.)
If he is named, Hillary may have promised to solely pick up the liability in this case.
This goes a long way to painting this guy as “the bad guy” and Hillary as the misled babe in the woods.
As an aside. I know a women that got a fairly quick and generous devorse settlement because her lawyer threaten to make her x take the fifth in devorse court. The guy had shady undeclared gambling proceeds. He was an assistant district attorney that used wire taps of harness race horse owners to discover them fixing races and then himself bet those races big.
How can you ask for immunity AND THEN assert 5th ammendment rights?
I mean, once you are granted total immunity it is probably in your best interest to spill your guts and get off scott-free for anything.
I would admit to anything and everything up to and including the candy-bar I stole when I was 5 or 6.
It would be the same. This weasels push everything over the limit.
“This asshat was granted full immunity and still invokes the 5th which is his right.”
Generally, once you have been granted immunity, you can’t invoke the 5th anymore, since you are not in danger of being prosecuted. Ordinary citizens who would try this would be jailed for contempt until they agreed to answer the questions.
Apparently, Hillary’s minions are not ordinary citizens.
The civil case is only FOIA, he has no personal financial stake in it.
I’ve never seen the $30,000 amount before. Where did you get this? (I’m not to cast doubt — just want to expand my knowledge. I am particularly interested in finding out what entity did the paying).
I don’t understand it.
Immunity means IMMUNITY.
That means he’s got no 5th Amendment recourse if he accepts the immunity deal, right?
___________
Wrong. If you don’t have a legal background it might be confusing, but he was granted limited USE immunity to cooperate with the FBI in a CRIMINAL investigation. Look at that as a contract between Pag. and the Feds, simply saying the FBI will not USE HIS TESTIMONY IF CALLED BY THE FBI, or STATEMENTS GIVEN TO THE FBI or their DERIVATIVE FRUITS against him in a prosecution. That is the scope of the deal, as far as has been revealed. Thus, no one gave him blanket use immunity or “TRANSACTIONAL” immunity (look that term up if you want) such as to immunize him if he gets involved in an unrelated CIVIL case involving Judicial Watch and the State Dep. over Benghazi emails and what not. You can accept this explanation or not, but that is LEGALLY what’s going on.
By the way, the Clintons would have LOVED him to testify in the civil case, and thus have a full outline of all he knows and has said. They would LOVE to have this information before their OWN FBI interviews. See? Today is not what everybody thinks VIS A VIS the FBI investigation. This helps, not hurts, that. That is NOT TO SAY HRC will be indicted, but only to say that today’s events are what the FBI would expect of their informant—they asked the judge in the civil case NOT to reveal the scope of his immunity agreement, which contains his “PROFFER” to them. They do not want that public.
Haa, haa... the FBI is stonewalling and protecting Clinton. There is zero evidence that they will do anything. They provided Limited Use so nothing bad is leaked that could damage her. Clinton is too big to jail.
“That means very likely he answered nothing”
Right out of the Clinton playbook:
Senate Investigator: Good morning Mrs. Clinton, How are you?
Mrs. Clinton: I’m sorry, I don’t recall.
That makes no sense. To protect her you DON”T give him immunity, and rather let him take the 5th in all FBI interviews, shrug and say “Oh well, we tried!” Hey, believe what you want, it’s fine.
I believe Lynch will protect her FROM the FBI. I believe thee is an actual and rather energetic FBI investigation into the matter, and that Lynch will kill it.
More from Obama’s Most Transparent Administration no doubt. What a coven of liars and deceitful people that God hates (Psalm 5: 5,6).
He must've received an offer he couldn't refuse from the clinton crime syndicate.
Eighteen months, with time off for good behavior, in a Country Club (prison?) versus being found off a lonely stretch in Ft Marcy Park as a staged suicide.
JW got what they wanted. By the judge allowing JW to ask Pagliano every question they had on their slate, they can now assert that Hitlery is the only possible source of those answers.
Hitlery’s attorneys will challenge such a ruling if it goes in JW’s favor - their hope is to drag her deposition past the election. So, it comes down to timing. If she is forced to testify, JW gets either her invoking the 5th - or take a chance on embarrassing answers (the competence argument comes to mind) - or gets caught in multiple lies.
This is half a yard forward, but the game continues.
IANAL, but there are two types of immunity in criminal cases: “use” and “transactional”.
“Use” immunity allows (forces) you to answer questions in a criminal proceeding, and the prosecution cannot use your statements against you. However, if they can corroborate the facts of your testimony some other way, they can still prosecute you for the crime about which you testified.
“Transactional” immunity prohibits prosecution for the crime under any circumstances.
JW got what they wanted. By the judge allowing JW to ask Pagliano every question they had on their slate, they can now assert that Hitlery is the only possible source of those answers.
Hitlery’s attorneys will challenge such a ruling if it goes in JW’s favor - their hope is to drag her deposition past the election. So, it comes down to timing. If she is forced to testify, JW gets either her invoking the 5th - or take a chance on embarrassing answers (the competence argument comes to mind) - or gets caught in multiple lies.
This is half a yard forward, but the game continues.
___________
These are very well thought out points.
You are correct.
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.