Good day all. When last we heard of Bryan Pagliano, he had been given immunity by the Justice Department in order to get him to answer questions regarding the E-mail server he set up for Cankles Clinton.
Now he is being required to testify in the civil case brought against Cankles and the State Department. Pagliano is fighting video recording the questioning saying it would be a waste of time since he intends to take the 5th and refuse to testify. Here are the details from Fox News:
The man who set up Hillary Clinton’s private email server will assert his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and refuse to answer questions over an open records lawsuit, according to court documents obtained Wednesday by Fox News. Bryan Pagliano declined to answer questions from watchdog group Judicial Watch during his deposition scheduled for Monday, according to his lawyers.
This is puzzling to me. I thought he was given immunity from prosecution and would then be required to answer all question put to him. How is it he can decline to answer these questions? Doesn’t is immunity agreement cover this? To top it off, his lawyer is also demanding that the questioning not be recorded on video.
His lawyers also asked a federal judge to block Judicial Watch from recording his deposition, stating that a written transcription should be enough.
“Given the constitutional implications, the absence of any proper purpose for video recording the deposition, and the considerable risk of abuse, the Court should preclude Judicial Watch, Inc. (“Judicial Watch”) from creating an audiovisual recording of Mr. Pagliano’s deposition,” they wrote.
His lawyers added that videotaped depositions “pose a serious danger to deponents invoking the Fifth Amendment.”
And how is recordings of him refusing to answer a danger to Pagliano? As far as I know, this is a civil case, not a criminal one. Granted, it makes him look guilty as hell, which he probably is, still, it is part of the trial record.
Pagliano, who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before helping install the so-called “homebrew” server system in her Chappaqua, N.Y. home, cut an immunity deal last fall with the Justice Department amid the FBI probe. He was recently described to Fox News by an intelligence source as a “devastating witness.”
That doesn’t bode well for the continued freedom of the Cankled One, does it? Obviously, once he had his immunity, he spilled the beans and put butter on them. This bring me back to the question of the moment, how is it that Pagliano can get away with taking the 5th if he has immunity from prosecution? I guess we’ll have to wait for an explanation from a lawyer. As it is, Pagliano refusing to testify does nothing to help Clinton if that was his goal.
Thatisall
~The Angry Webmaster~
[yasr_visitor_votes size=”medium”]
While I am not a lawyer(spit), it seems pretty clear. These are two different cases, his immunity is for the criminal case the Federal Bureau of Intimidation is pursuing.
The one where he is going to plead the Fifth is a civil case brought by a private entity, Commisariat of Injustice can’t give immunity there.
The last lawyer in my family is retiring soon and hopefully there will never be another one. However, I thought that the 5th dealt with criminal charges from the government, not a civil complaint by private entities?
Oh well, I’m sure someone can explain it. Perhaps they should name him as a co-defendant?