Posted on 06/04/2016 12:25:08 PM PDT by DrDude
Anyone have any thoughts on the IT guy who ran Hillary's Server? I always thought something was wrong and mentioned it several times. Agreement to assist the FBI? No testimony required. No details of what he has done or said to FBI. Clinton doesn't appear to be concerned and the guy is still alive. Sounds more fishy than V. Foster's suicide. Maybe Judge Sullivan knows something. Maybe JW knows something and informed the Judge in the briefs. Seems very last minute. Just like Mills avoiding videotaped deposition at the very last moment. Is this going to happen for each witness?
Nice insight.
The law is the law....(smirk).
Federal Judge Orders Clinton I.T. Official To Explain Immunity Agreement – Delays Deposition…
Posted on June 4, 2016 by sundance
Because Vince Foster.
The speed with which Judge Sullivan ordered Pagliano’s lawyers to produce the immunity agreement implies he is fed up with the Clinton gang’s stonewalling, evading, and can’t remembering. Pagliano must prove that his answers to potential questions in this limited scope depo could actually be used against him in criminal proceedings. What transpires next will be very interesting. If Sullivan rules that the immunity agreement gives Pagliano sufficient immunity to submit to the deposition, P. has to answer, or, presumably, go to jail for contempt. Since Pagliano is a “little person”, that might happen. The publicity for Hillary would be, uh, adverse.
Forcing Pagliano’s DoJ immunity agreement into view could reveal whether the FBI is really investigating
or just pretending. (It’s possible the judge will review the agreement but seal it from public view. JW should try to get it into the public record.) I’ll actually be shocked if the Clinton/DoJ machine allows the immunity agreement to be released to the judge at all. Major delay, appeals, and DoJ interference coming up.
This being a civil case, the standard is preponderance of the evidence, not a beyond a reasonable doubt. I wonder if the judge will see stonewalling, pleading the fifth, etc., as positive evidence for people accused of stonewalling and evading the FOIA?
I hope Sullivan orders Hillary to submit to deposition. I’d like to see JW ask her, given Pagliano’s pleading the fifth and all, if she is aware of any crimes that Pagliano might have committed. Answering no could be a big perjury trap for her. Answering yes could be worse.
That is the most likely option. My gut tells me there is a problem with the Immunity Agreement. The FBI can not issue the agreement. The DOJ would do that(just like the indictment). DOJ has been blocking the FBI in the entire matter. Maybe they were playing this IT Guy kind of “loosely”. Maybe that is what the Judge is looking into. Many types of immunity. Maybe the IA covers him for the Server issues but not the espionage aspect. Maybe they are limited in what he is allowed to be asked by the FBI. So many questions!
“Because Vince Foster. “
I would think if he had Fosternecrophobia that he would already have moved to Jakarta and changed his name to Patel.
“One other possiblity: the FBI wants Pagliano to take the 5th. Otherwise, Clinton and other potential targets for indictment may learn what Pagliano told the FBI, giving them the chance to change their story.”
Ding, ding, ding....we have our winner.
Yeah. Something smells. Then again when it comes to the clintoons; something always smells. They are simply corrupt.
The headline in your link is very interesting. Judge wants IT Guy to “Explain” the agreement. Explaining and producing are two different matters. Judge wants the Agreement and wants IT GUY to explain something in the agreement. I tend to be one who doesn’t trust the DOJ so I would hope Judge found something. DOJ drew up the Agreement. Not IT GUY.
Maybe they are waiting for IT Guy to pass the bar so he can claim he is Hillary’s “other” Lawyer!
Knowing what is in the immunity agreement is the key to knowing where the FBI is going with its investigation also what questions might be ripe for Pagliano to answer in the civil suit. I don’t think you can blanket take the 5th for all questions but only question by question.
On the other hand, this may be the only legal way to get the truth out to the public, with the Department of Justice being on the Clinton team in this one.
Wouldn’t that be the “Clinton Fraudation”?
Her claim of attorney-client privilege would only cover conversations that occurred since the time Mills was her attorney of record. Any previous correspondence or conversation when Mills was her Chief of Staff would be discoverable. The way Judge Sullivan has been ruling on this case, Judicial Watch may well get the Judge to compel Mills to answer.
Whoever JW’s lead counsel is is doing a good job of giving Hillery’s key players enough rope to hang themselves. He has identified areas where Mills and Abadeen don’t want to answer. He can then get the Judge to force an answer. Judge Sullivan’s recent ruling on her IT guy’s immunity agreement may be the straw that breaks Hillary’s back.
Or Wang in Beijing.
But this little cockroach can’t even seem to find the dark.
I don’t know. This is exactly why RICO laws where written. To pierce Omertà.
I think Kendall himself should be charged with something. He is equally guilty of stonewalling and cover up.
Something is up but who knows. Sid Blumenbitch started attacking Trump yesterday. He of the CLASSIFIED information to & from Hillarys Server.
5th amendment protections in civil cases are much more limited than in criminal cases. The person has to have a real, reasonable expectation that testimony would result in prosecution for them to be able to assert their 5th amendment rights. So you can’t take the 5th if your testimony would be embarrassing, or cause you to lose the civil case. Hell, you can’t even do it if your testimony would cause you to perjure yourself (I.e. You said one thing in a previous criminal case but something different in the civil case). The opposing attorney can challenge any attempt to take the 5th in a civil case, unlike a criminal case.
Pagliano has an immunity deal, he’s a witness (not the defendant) in the civil case, and he has no expectation of prosecution. He will have to testify.
Oh, also in civil cases you can’t just take the 5th and walk out. You have to assert for every question or set of questions. And the other attorney can challenge every time if he wants to.
JW know all this, and they will get Paglinao to testify or be held in contempt.
Oh no, that’s safely tucked away out of sight in the Cayman’s until she Herself becomes Queen, oh sorry, President, that is.
In Mills’ case the judge agreed not to video tape it because of the fear that those tapes would end up in anti Clinton commercials.
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.