Want more hot BPR News stories? Sign up for our morning blast HERE
It looks like Hillary Clinton’s information technology specialist’s ability to claim his Fifth Amendment privilege may be about to come to a close.
A federal judge ordered Bryan Pagliano, the IT technician who set up the former secretary of state’s private email server, to produce the specifics of the immunity agreement he has with the Justice Department, according to The Daily Caller.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Bill Clinton appointee who has nonetheless been critical of both the State Department and the former secretary over her email scandal, also indefinitely held over Pagliano’s deposition with Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group.
Sullivan’s order Friday came in response to a motion by Pagliano’s lawyers to prohibit Judicial Watch from video recording its deposition with the IT specialist, during which he has repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right to refuse to answer questions that may tend to incriminate the person being questioned.
The Daily Caller reported:
Little is known about Pagliano’s agreement with the government. But The New York Times reported in March that Pagliano was granted limited immunity rather than blanket immunity. Limited immunity is a narrower agreement that prevents a witnesses’ words from being used against them. Blanket immunity is a promise not to prosecute at all.
Sign up for our morning blast HERE
Journalist and American Commitment president Phil Kerpen tweeted:
Judge Sullivan orders HRod’s server boy to produce his reported immunity agreement in @JudicialWatch case! pic.twitter.com/VFyvVkvy2S
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) June 3, 2016
And observers were delighted.
@kerpen @tci92 @JudicialWatch Yes! The judge is on to him. He’s abusing the 5th.
— LisaPizza (@LisaPizza9) June 4, 2016
@DailyCaller Nice move by the Judge
— Ron Atkins (@RonAtkins) June 5, 2016
@TXJackCC @kerpen @JudicialWatch @HillaryClinton Wow! You went there lol but so true indeed. Bryan better look out for himself
— Travis Angry (@TravisAngry) June 4, 2016
@kerpen @instapundit @JudicialWatch way to go @JudicialWatch !!! Can’t wait to read it!
— timothy m. ryan (@strandleper) June 4, 2016
If you have immunity, why need a 5A refusal to testify? I think he’d be better off with bodyguards. https://t.co/6nSWU4v4BZ
— Robert J Jacobsen (@RobertJJacobsen) June 4, 2016
And one person reasoned:
@DailyCaller if the person paid to set up the system needs immunity, how can the 1 that hired and used the system be w/out culpability?
— Christine yates (@th_christine) June 5, 2016
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- ‘Act like a grownup’: Drunk driver sobs when she loses plea deal by coming 4 hours late to court - July 23, 2017
- ‘I would’ve fired her the day I met her’: Glenn Beck reveals more about Tomi Lahren mess - July 23, 2017
- Canadian thug beats 74-year-old cyclist bloody with a club in road rage fit– and they say US is more violent? - July 23, 2017
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
