Manafort's surrender shows Mueller probe's overwhelming force

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: yuppa


Innocent people don't need to plead to a court that telling the truth would incriminate them.

Trump could take the 5th Amendment or not comply with subpoena to testify: Rudy Giuliani abcnews.go.com...

personally ive used it and was innocent. why? shoddy memory. medically diagnosed but still i just dont trust lawmen.

a reply to: yuppa


If you don't have a clear or trustworthy memory, you say "I don't recall", like Jeff Sessions. If what you remember would implicatte you in a crime, you plead the 5th.

a reply to: Sookiechacha
either one works, and neither method alludes to guilt or innocence. Pleading the fifth is a constitutional right. I did it once and I was quite innocent myself. Sometimes its not about incriminating yourself. Sometimes we may not want to incriminate our friends or family instead

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Sometimes we may not want to incriminate our friends or family instead

You can't plead the 5th because you don't want to tell the court the truth about your friend's crimes. That's not what the 5th is for. If you do, you may be guilty of perjury.

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights and protects a person against being compelled to be a witness against himself or herself in a criminal case.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: worldstarcountry

Sometimes we may not want to incriminate our friends or family instead

You can't plead the 5th because you don't want to tell the court the truth about your friend's crimes. That's not what the 5th is for. If you do, you may be guilty of perjury.

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights and protects a person against being compelled to be a witness against himself or herself in a criminal case.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Funny. you dont have to answer a question at all no matter what it is. thats your right as well.

a reply to: yuppa

No, it isn't. If you refuse to answer a question, the judge can send you to jail for "Contempt". That's why the 5th Amendment is so important. No one, not even a federal judge, can compel you to testify against yourself. But, when it comes to what you know about anyone else, except your spouse, there's no law to protect you, unless you're a journalist (sources are protected) or a priest.

What would you define as a "credible source"?

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: HunkaHunka


Can you find a credible source stating that Manafort "flipped" on Trump? I've looked all over.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: yuppa

No, it isn't. If you refuse to answer a question, the judge can send you to jail for "Contempt". That's why the 5th Amendment is so important. No one, not even a federal judge, can compel you to testify against yourself. But, when it comes to what you know about anyone else, except your spouse, there's no law to protect you, unless you're a journalist (sources are protected) or a priest.

Thats called blackmail but its overlooked because they want to co erse you. Its just they have not done this to the right person yet. I know people who went to jail for contempt. they never said a word either and the judge eventually gave up because the trial costed so much to run. if you yourself are not guilty of anything and they toss you in jail for that its unconstitutional.

a reply to: yuppa


That may be the case, I have no way of knowing what you're talking about. Nevertheless, the 5th Amendment can't be legally used to refuse to testify unless testifying would incrimination oneself in a crime. The 5th Amendment protects against forced self incrimination, not forced incrimination of your friend.

need s stipulation added to the fifth added to cover friends as well because snitches usually end up dead from time to time.

a reply to: Sookiechacha
Bro, humans aren't supposed to do alot of things, the least of which is utilizing the fifth. Unless you got mind readers in court rooms, it's kind of pointless to rant about.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Bro, humans aren't supposed to do alot of things, the least of which is utilizing the fifth.

Maybe humans were never meant to "bare arms" or speak freely, or be secure in their person and papers, or free to travel without harassment.

a reply to: Sookiechacha
Not really sure where your going with this now, your all over the place. But our actual arms are our original weapons (armaments), so clearly we were meant to bear them and Any weapon we could wield seeing as we have no claws, tusks or fangs.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Uh? You're not sure where I'm going with your claim that humans were never supposed to access the 5th Amendment? You think I'm "all over the place" for asking if your claim also extends to the 1st, 2nd and 4th Amendments too?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: yuppa


If you don't have a clear or trustworthy memory, you say "I don't recall", like Jeff Sessions. If what you remember would implicatte you in a crime, you plead the 5th.

unless you are accusing scotus nominees of course....

a reply to: Sookiechacha
It was a poorly constructed sentence. You listed a specific condition for the fifth to be used, and two of us explained it to you there are other personal reasons so eone may use the fifth, and you responded illegal and unallowed. To which the context I replied was the lots of things humans do that they should not, least of which is using the fifth for personal reasons Under oath other than self incrimination (like the incrimination of loved ones or friends). Without that testimony to establish guilt people can escape heavy charges or even walk free.

The point I was trying to make though with you saying "nuh uh you can't do that!" Is unless you have a mind reader in court you cannot say one way or another that the defendant is protecting themselves or someone else by refusing to testify.

Was that more clear??

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Was that more clear??

Right. Very clear. If you lie while claiming the 5th Amendment and nobody catches you in that lie, it's not illegal. Is that what you're saying?

Again: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. [/I]