Bratt on the right. We know Captain Insanity on the left
Posted on 05/15/2025 10:35:30 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
A key prosecutor on the classified documents case against President Donald Trump invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a congressional interview Wednesday, ....
Jay Bratt had been subpoenaed to appear before the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee for a closed-door interview but did not answer substantive questions because of his Fifth Amendment constitutional right to remain silent.
Bratt spent more than three decades at the Justice Department before retiring in January, just weeks before President Donald Trump took office. He was a key national security prosecutor on special counsel Jack Smith’s team, which in 2023 charged Trump with illegally hoarding classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and with obstructing the government’s efforts to recover them.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
Guilty basturd.
You’re permitted to plead the fifth when employed by the federal government?
I’m holding my breath until MSNBC picks up and reports on this story. . . . /sarc
Per the rules of the left pleading the 54th means he is automatically guilty of all suspected crimes being discussed. Lock him up on the premise alone.
Did they call Jack Smith in to testify?
of course
to save his skin... not just from any prosecution but from his runners with the commie/nazi/”progressive” DNC machine (who would have him “offed” if he squealed...)?
Imagine prosecuting charges against someone and then pleading the fifth when questioned about the case you brought.
As citizen he has the right to plead the Fifth.
As a member of the bar and an employee of the gubmint, I believe there should be repercussions for taking the fifth.
“Imagine prosecuting charges against someone and then pleading the fifth when questioned about the case you brought”
The thought of civil rights being trampled upon comes to mind.
This should be immediate disbarment then criminal charges
-PJ
Jay Bratt had been subpoenaed to appear before the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee for a closed-door interview but did not answer substantive questions because of his Fifth Amendment constitutional right to remain silent.
I don’t think Government employees should have that right. When you use the power of Federal Government, and your employed and pensioned by Federal Government, pleading the fifth Amendment should be allowed. He should be stripped of all pension and pay back his salary (including any coverage for family). Just like IRS louis lerner, they need to reconsider how we as a nation deal with these individuals. This kind of abuse of Federal Government power has to stop, and hanging a few people is a good start.
LOL!!! PUT THIS POS’s ASS IN JAIL
All Americans have a right against self-incrimination. That said, there are some qualifiers for government employees. Basically, you don't have to answer a cop's questions, but what about a cop who is being questioned by his sergeant?
Pretty much everybody is familiar with the Miranda Warning - that applies to the general citizenry. Government employees may be subjected to either Garrity Warnings or Kalkines Warnings depending on the type of the investigation.
Essentially, any American has a right to decline to speak with law enforcement (i.e. "government"). On the other hand, an employer may require an employee to cooperate with an investigation as a condition of employment.
Garrity was (IIRC) a NJ State Cop who was involved in a ticket fixing scheme. Hie employer compelled him to make a statement under threat of being fired if he didn't, so he confessed to the scheme. The case against him was overturned because the confession had been coerced. Subsequent case law led to the Garrity and Kalkines warnings which basically break down as follows:
GARRITY: A (Gov't) employee is advised that he is being questioned for a criminal matter for which they have a right to remain silent, however, the evidentiary value of their silence may be considered in administrative proceedings against them.
KALKINES:Is basically the opposite. The (Gov't) employee is advised that they are being questioned in an internal/administrative matter, and they are being compelled to answer questions as a condition of their employment; however, they are provided immunity for statements made in the course of the interview.
Note that with Kalkines, it is a limited immunity restricted solely to statements made within the interview or the administrative investigation. If the person admits to criminal activity, they are still subject to a criminal investigation, it's just that their admission or other evidence provided to the administrative investigator can't be used in criminal proceedings. It would require a separate (but usually parallel) criminal investigation to develop and obtain independent evidence.
Like execution.
ROFL!!!!!
As a private citizen, and not a juror, I can interpret “taking the fifth” any way I like.
In this case, I think it means that the truth would seriously incriminate this emulator of Oedipus ... no prosecutorial shenanigans necessary.
Bratt on the right. We know Captain Insanity on the left
This takes my breath away. The evil perpetrated by the left is beyond comprehension. I hope that Martin includes him in his investigation of the weaponization of the DOJ against Americans, especially against President Trump.
You know it’s bad enough to be just butt ugly but a crocked snake rats too!!!
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.