Hillary's Server Guy To Plead The 5TH

originally posted by: harvestdog

The former aide to Hillary Clinton who helped set up and maintain her private email server has declined to talk to the FBI and the State Department inspector general’s office, as well as a congressional committee, invoking his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself, sources familiar with the investigation confirmed to Yahoo News.

Yahoo News
It seems this guys has not cooperated with the House special committee, the State Department, or the FBI. Looks like he is dug in deep.

Now he gets to live in his own private Hell.

Yep, he should've learned CYA. He should have come out early on, laying the hammer on Hilary in the press. Making it clear that Hil was in charge. He is feeling pressure from both sides now. It's not looking good for him to totally snub investigators from all sides.

a reply to: butcherguy

I never implied that. But pleading the fifth doesn't make a person guilty even though everyone views it as a sign of guilt anyways. And invoking such a reason and it actually being true is reason enough in my view.

I do so love how 'transparent' the CLinton team is.

Glorious things await us if she ever becomes Potus.

I can't wait and God help us all if she ever does.

Pleading the 5th. Is what people do when they want to try hide criminal activity.

Everyone knows that.

originally posted by: neo96
Pleading the 5th. Is what people do when they want to try hide criminal activity.

Pleading the 5th is what you do when there's no good outcome. I posted the truth table earlier, but if he doesn't talk he's not going to be convicted. If he does talk, he gives prosecutors ammunition to come after him and maybe even charge him with something when they otherwise couldn't, even if he's law abiding.

It's the same reason that when cops arrest you, you don't speak until there's a lawyer present. Everything you say, even when it's completely law abiding is only assisting in building a case against yourself.

Most probably, he's in fear of perjury.
Investigators will collect all the testimony they can from others...before they offer him immunity from prosecution for testifying. In other words...he doesn't yet know if higher ups are throwing him under the bus to take the fall for them.

His lawyers are aware of this and advised him to wait for an offer of immunity.

This is hilarious. Many here are always clamoring about Constitutional Rights. Usually it's the 1st and 2nd that people are so vocal about. BUT this guy uses another aspect of the Constitution and people get bent about the avenue that the Founding Fathers put in the Document. And let's be honest here. NO ONE cares who this guy is. It's his relationship with Clinton that this is really about.

I posted the truth table earlier, but if he doesn't talk he's not going to be convicted.

Unless he committed a crime for which evidence is found.

It's sad that exercising the 5th is tantamount to insta-guilt.

The biggest thing to remember is that it grants the right to not self-incriminate. If you put the right lawyer in front of someone, and have that lawyer ask the right questions -- anyone can be made to look guilty of just about anything.

Twisting of words or taking things out of context and omitting information can turn an innocent person guilty pretty quick. This is what the 5th was designed to protect people from.

originally posted by: intrepid
This is hilarious. Many here are always clamoring about Constitutional Rights. Usually it's the 1st and 2nd that people are so vocal about. BUT this guy uses another aspect of the Constitution and people get bent about the avenue that the Founding Fathers put in the Document. And let's be honest here. NO ONE cares who this guy is. It's his relationship with Clinton that this is really about.

Thing is the state continually usurps those rights.

Then turns around and uses it to protect itself.

No one really knows just exactly who is being 'protected' here.

Clinton or the administration.

I think congress should just give a congressional order to the NSA ( WHICH is 100% totally LEGAL) , and within the confines of congressional oversight. Which is the entire point of it.

Nothing can be hidden from the NSA it sees all it knows all.

a reply to: neo96

So this man's Constitutional rights should be what? Void? That was tried. Remember the Salem Witch Hunt? Hell, you only have to go back to the 50's with Mccarthyism to see what a bad road that is.

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: neo96

So this man's Constitutional rights should be what? Void? That was tried. Remember the Salem Witch Hunt? Hell, you only have to go back to the 50's with Mccarthyism to see what a bad road that is.

Don't recall anyone saying the should be, but then again constitutional rights are violated on a daily basis.

I do remember the Salem Witch Hunt, and we have the modern day versions going on about gun owners,bankers,corporations rich people.

Who needs to go back to the 50s ?

It never stopped.

I will expand further.

We are talking about government business,government documents which by all rights the state is entitled to.

On a private individuals server.

By all RIGHTS that is state property, and does constitutional protections extend to that ?

I don't think so, others will disagree.

a reply to: intrepid

Salem Witch Hunt?
Let's not forget that the man is refusing to cooperate in a Federal investigation.
He is withholding documents in his possession and refusing to answer questions before congress.
Yes, he has his constitutional rights...but he also has a obligation to help investigators uncover potential wrongdoing at some very high levels of government.

originally posted by: intrptr

Remember Nixons excuse how certain watergate tapes got erased? He had his secretary pose for pics of stretching in all directions and 'accidentally' hitting the erase "foot pedal"…lol.

Same stuff, different tech.

ETA: link to images

Exactly. And what, how long did it take for him to resign?
With Clinton, its been what...5 years? I have an idea, we can
rename the administration....The Stonewall Administration.

If only the borders were as secure as all of thier corruption!

ETA: What Hillary has done is far worse, beyond anything Watergate ever amounted to.

originally posted by: neo96
I will expand further.

We are talking about government business,government documents which by all rights the state is entitled to.

On a private individuals server.

By all RIGHTS that is state property, and does constitutional protections extend to that ?

I don't think so, others will disagree.

The Right is against self incrimination so.... yes, it DOES extend to this. Ya can't just pick and choose what parts of the Constitution are vital and others that are inconvenient.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...but he also has a obligation to help investigators uncover potential wrongdoing at some very high levels of government.

He does? Where is that in the Constitution? As it relates to his 5th Amendment rights?

a reply to: intrepid

The Right is against self incrimination so.... yes, it DOES extend to this. Ya can't just pick and choose what parts of the Constitution are vital and others that are inconvenient.

Why not ?

Again happens every day.

Since those files where deemed to be 'classified' no constitutional protections extend to them.

Remember now the constitution was created as a protection from the STATE.

Now it is being used to PROTECT the state.

Which is NOT why it was created.

a reply to: intrepid

Who is denying the guy his right to plead the 5th?