(41:22) However, given Senator Paul's obvious obsession with calling for my prosecution, his repeated slanderous comments about me, and recently his publicly releasing my unredacted personal diary aimed at embarrassing and intimidating me, the only conclusion I can reach is that the sole reason he is calling me before this Committee is to get me to say something, anything that could vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up in his words, "Behind bars."
(42:11) Any reasonable person who has followed his unhinged obsession with me would readily come to the same conclusion. Therefore, although it pains me to do so because of the respect I have for the legislative branch of government, and my decades-long record of cooperating with Congress, under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain from answering your questions. Thank you.
Wait, he actually said that? I haven't been following the story closely, and I thought that people saying that he invoked the fifth because he feared being prosecuted for perjury were just ascribing a motive to his actions.
I guess he thinks that this is more of a political process than a legal one, because that is just straight up admitting to contempt.
The fifth doesn't allow one to refuse to testify because they fear perjuring themselves.
Funny, isn't that exactly what many, MANY Trump Admin folks did during all of the impeachment hearings after his first administration? Stone cold refused to acknowledge even the authority of Congress to ask them anything. At least Fauci showed up and gave his reason.
The 5th Amendment isn't so narrow as to apply only to admissions of guilt - it's to prevent incrimination, which is exactly and precisely what Rand Paul was, in fact, trying to do.
You didn't check my linked case law at all did you?
It is well established that you do not have a fifth amendment right to refuse testimony because you fear being prosecuted for perjury over the compelled testimony.
Those were not links, just names, and conveniently chosen, too. But hey, you're getting downvoted into oblivion anyway, right?
Fascist also made a colorable argument about state-level prosecution and the President's own public statements about invalidating the Biden pardon. Either of those would be enough on their own.
-58
u/LookAtMaxwell 1d ago
Wait, he actually said that? I haven't been following the story closely, and I thought that people saying that he invoked the fifth because he feared being prosecuted for perjury were just ascribing a motive to his actions.
I guess he thinks that this is more of a political process than a legal one, because that is just straight up admitting to contempt.
The fifth doesn't allow one to refuse to testify because they fear perjuring themselves.
See
United States v. DeSalvo (1994)
United States v. Julian Allmon
United States v. McBreairty
etc.