Former President Donald Trump invokes Fifth Amendment rights and declines to answer questions from NY attorney general

[Eric]

Separate topic that warrants its own thread.

Former President Donald Trump invokes Fifth Amendment rights and declines to answer questions from NY attorney general​

Former President Donald Trump invokes Fifth Amendment rights and declines to answer questions from NY attorney general

Former President Donald Trump invoked his Fifth Amendment rights and declined to answer questions from the New York attorney general at a scheduled deposition Wednesday.

www.cnn.com

 

[fooferdoggie]

so he is guilty according to his own words great. throw him in jail.

 

[fischersd]

Trump declines to answer questions in New York business investigation

Ex-president pleads the fifth two days after the FBI raided his Florida home seeking classified documents

www.theguardian.com

“In New York City tonight. Seeing racist NYS Attorney General tomorrow, for a continuation of the greatest Witch Hunt in US history!” Trump wrote, repeating an insult he has repeatedly thrown at James, who is Black and the first woman of color ever to hold statewide elected office in New York.

This shit stain has no levels of depravity he won't sink to. Racist bastard having the audacity of calling a black woman a racist?! OMFG!!!

Edit: And, yes, I know, racists come in all colours...white people don't have a monopoly on it...but, given the last 300 years, every white person in 'merica should be walking on friggin eggshells.

(and, yes, we have lots to be ashamed of this side of the border as well).

 

[mac_in_tosh]

so he is guilty according to his own words great. throw him in jail.

He's already acknowledged what he said before about people taking the fifth, but of course now that it's him and it's a "witch hunt" he says he was justified in doing it.

 

[Nycturne]

Edit: And, yes, I know, racists come in all colours...white people don't have a monopoly on it...but, given the last 300 years, every white person in 'merica should be walking on friggin eggshells.

It's true, but I've learned to differentiate between racist people who are backed by the hegemony and the power it wields, versus racist people who "just" make themselves unpleasant/dangerous to be around. It's hard to be black, racist against another group, and backed by the hegemony in North America, so it kinda limits the harm inflicted by it. There's generally a difference in the outcomes of a random black person taking their frustrations out on me once in a blue moon, versus what black people have to put up with in the other direction.

That said, I do think you hit on an interesting point. Folks like Trump conflate the two, intentionally trying to paint them as the same, thus justifying elimination of things meant to promote equity in the face of systemic racism.

 

[fooferdoggie]

dont worry in bragging he will tell all this rally goers all the things he pled the fifth to

 

[Cmaier]

I never had anyone take the fifth on me, but I did have a witness flee the state the night before the deposition because he found out I knew he had been disbarred and he was calling himself a “general counsel.” Didn’t find out he wasn’t going to show until after the deposition was supposed to start - I called his lawyer and was told “he doesn’t feel well so he went home.”

 

[Eric]

Words of wisdom.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Won’t be good for him if they already have any goods on him and go to a civil trial. The judge will explicitly state that they can take his exercising of fifth amendment rights into consideration of his guilt if they see fit.

Unfortunately, these converging civil and criminal investigations play into the narrative that “everyone is out to get Trump”. I mean, R. Kelly had (and has) a bunch of converging criminal trials too. Could it be that maybe Trump, like R. Kelly, is a lifelong criminal who dodged the law forever until it finally caught up to him?

 

[Yoused]

I would think that taking the 5th on every question is a serious gamble, because once you do that, you have excluded yourself from participating in discussion of the matter. The court cannot get information from you on those matters, and cannot draw any inferences regarding your reticence, so it has to rely on the testimony of others. That seems like a dangerous position to be in.

 

[Cmaier]

I would think that taking the 5th on every question is a serious gamble, because once you do that, you have excluded yourself from participating in discussion of the matter. The court cannot get information from you on those matters, and cannot draw any inferences regarding your reticence, so it has to rely on the testimony of others. That seems like a dangerous position to be in.

Actually since this is a civil matter the court CAN draw the inference that if you had answered truthfully the information you provided would have incriminated you.

 

[Yoused]

Actually since this is a civil matter …

Why the hell is NYAG pursuing a civil matter?

 

[Cmaier]

Why the hell is NYAG pursuing a civil matter?

NY is a weird state and the city of New York has jurisdiction. However, the AG could have gone to the Governor when the NYC DA and asked that it be assigned to her, because the governor has the ability to reassign a criminal case to any prosecutor, but she apparently didn’t do that. Normally the NY AG doesn’t do a lot of criminal prosecutions. This is actually a plot line in the TV show Billions.

 

[Runs For Fun]

Apparently 440 times!

Trump took Fifth Amendment more than 440 times in refusing to answer New York attorney general's questions

Trump has raged over the New York attorney general's probe, an FBI raid on his Florida home Mar-a-Lago and investigations into the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

www.cnbc.com

 

[sgtaylor5]

Apparently 440 times!

Trump took Fifth Amendment more than 440 times in refusing to answer New York attorney general's questions

Trump has raged over the New York attorney general's probe, an FBI raid on his Florida home Mar-a-Lago and investigations into the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.

www.cnbc.com

Sorry the embed is so huge, but I have to:

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1266361841221066752/

 

[Yoused]

I have to wonder about rote invocation of 5A. If the questioner throws one in that clearly could not possibly yield an incriminating response (e.g., "what day was yesterday?") but he still invokes 5A, what would we be able to infer from that?

 

[Cmaier]

I have to wonder about rote invocation of 5A. If the questioner throws one in that clearly could not possibly yield an incriminating response (e.g., "what day was yesterday?") but he still invokes 5A, what would we be able to infer from that?

Not much. you never know what is incriminating. For example, in your example, if he knows what day yesterday was that may be probative of a lack of insanity defense

 

[Yoused]

that may be probative of a lack of insanity defense

But is this not for a civil trial? I mean, I can see how rational intent might be applicable WRT punitive damages, but if you caused the damage, can you escape liability by claiming you were crazy (which, for that guy, proving should be a cakewalk)?

 

[Cmaier]

But is this not for a civil trial? I mean, I can see how rational intent might be applicable WRT punitive damages, but if you caused the damage, can you escape liability by claiming you were crazy (which, for that guy, proving should be a cakewalk)?

I think the actual defendant here is his company, not Trump himself. So, if I am representing the company, perhaps I argue that Trump is insane and therefore his actions should not be held against the company. Or something.

 

[Alli]

I think the actual defendant here is his company, not Trump himself. So, if I am representing the company, perhaps I argue that Trump is insane and therefore his actions should not be held against the company. Or something.

Thank goodness his legal team is nowhere near as good as you.