comment from WaPo on Pagliano plea

[grasswire]

Jan Loll
3:04 AM PDT [Edited]

“'Counsel for Mr. Pagliano shall file a Memorandum of Law addressing the legal authority upon which Mr. Pagliano relies to assert his Fifth Amendment rights in this civil proceeding,' Sullivan ordered in a brief note in the court docket Friday afternoon.

"Sullivan also told Pagliano’s lawyers to include 'requisite details pertaining to the scope' of an immunity agreement reported by The Washington Post in March, reached between him and the Justice Department in an FBI criminal investigation of the handling of classified information in Clinton’s email setup."

The 2nd one I understand, but the first one had me puzzled, until I read https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspir... where it notes that the Supreme Court has ruled that one can use the fifth amendment in a civil case, "when that compelled testimony could later be used against him in a criminal case."

Perhaps this is to try to force Pagliano to admit that there is a criminal case regarding the matter that he would otherwise risk criminal prosecution under?
................................

[YouDig]

1. So sad. Once proud Berners scrounging through comments sections for conspiracies.

[JonLeibowitz]

2. We're still proud Bernie Sanders supporters (we don't refer to ourselves as Berners, btw)

[YouDig]

3. Still proud, still scrounging through comments sections for conspiracies, still so sad.

What is the preferred shorthand term for "Bernie Sanders supporter"?

[JonLeibowitz]

6. Bernieac, Sanders supporters is fine. "Berners" appears to be a dismissive only HRC supporters use

[YouDig]

8. OK, I'll go with Berniac. But if someone complains about that one, you have to defend me.

I don't mean anything by it, I go with Berner, Hiller, and Trumper. SHort and simple. Somehow I think that Berniac is going to be perceived even worse, because it carries "maniac" implications. But I'll try. If I get a hide it's your fault.

[JonLeibowitz]

11. I think it is an homage to Deaniac, which is looked upon favorably, so you'll be fine.

[grasswire]

4. Isn't that what you are doing here every freaking day? nt

[YouDig]

5. You don't feel even a little sad that you're resorting to email conspiracies from comments sections?

Like not at all? Like a little at least?

[libdem4life]

10. Just a character from the children's book...The Three Billy Goats Gruff

Hint: Not one of the goats.

[SpareribSP]

7. One issue

It's also going to be unknown if him pleading the fifth is something covered by the immunity in the deposition without it. It doesn't matter that much much because the FBI will know, though. I think more than anything it's just bringing information out into the public eye.

[HereSince1628]

9. But there are other prosecutors who may claim jurisdiction and an interest

the FBI may not be too interested but I would think Pagliano's lawyers want the immunity interpreted to be as broad as possible.

[Babel_17]

12. All these investigations have been educational for us

There's so much detail to criminal law as it pertains to national security. Rarely do we see "intent" get the discussion it deserves.

[thesquanderer]

13. re: "when that compelled testimony could later be used against him in a criminal case."

You suggest, "Perhaps this is to try to force Pagliano to admit that there is a criminal case regarding the matter that he would otherwise risk criminal prosecution under?"

but does it have to be an existing criminal case? For example, what if your testimony in a civil case could implicate you in a criminal event that no one knows happened? So even though no criminal case exists, you could know that one might exist in the future (or might even come into existence *based* on the testimony), right? Maybe that applies here? Immunity could protect you from prosecution in one particular criminal case, but there could be more than one existing or potential criminal case you could possible have exposure in.

[grasswire]

14. yep, good reasoning

We have NO idea how deep the corruption is.

And that, I suppose, is why prosecuting attorneys probe so strategically. To see where sensitivity might be.