"Whether or not the predicament of the wrongdoer run to ground tugs at the heartstrings, neither the text nor the spirit of the Fifth Amendment confers a privilege to lie. "[P]roper invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against compulsory self-incrimination allows a witness to remain silent, but not to swear falsely."
Majority opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia.
It refers to law enforcement, period. The Fifth Amendment doesn't really care what kind of badge that you're being interrogated by, and that's what this case was addressing, since it was a SCOTUS case.
This particular case involved the IRS, but the IRS are federal agents, as are FBI. It explains this in the summary, if you don't want to read the full ruling.
There's nothing here that normies can't understand.
Normies just aren't going to care about a cybersecurity expert who worked for a Democratic POTUS candidate two elections ago being charged with something. That's pretty low down the totem pole to guarantee any sort of chain reaction, and political operatives being accused of stuff is pretty much the daily norm.
A charge is just an accusation, and an accusation isn't proof or conviction. It's just a charge.
It'll be the outcome of the trial that ultimately makes it into the normieverse, one way or the other. And even then, don't expect people to care unless there's a dramatic and loud reveal that makes it obvious someone big has been implicated in a way that is likely to result in viable legal action. Even if Sussman goes down, it isn't likely to exciting anyone if it doesn't show Obama or Clinton or someone big going on the next episode of the Durham Show.
Ultimately, we're all waiting to see what Durham will actually prove in court. I'm patient. I care far more about proof than accusations, and Durham will have a chance to present his proof.
Durham aside, I don’t understand how lying to the fbi can be a crime. Who the fuck are they such that lying to them is a crime???
Not saying your opinion is wrong, but wasn't the FBI that made the determination. It was SCOTUS, 1998: Brogan v United States:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/522/398/
Majority opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia.
Is that referring to the FBI?
It refers to law enforcement, period. The Fifth Amendment doesn't really care what kind of badge that you're being interrogated by, and that's what this case was addressing, since it was a SCOTUS case.
This particular case involved the IRS, but the IRS are federal agents, as are FBI. It explains this in the summary, if you don't want to read the full ruling.
https://m.theepochtimes.com/former-clinton-campaign-lawyer-made-false-statements-to-second-government-agency-durham_4408232.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-04-16-3&utm_medium=email&est=fjNVfFY7PnysUUdWllMEwT3WjW4La%2FIBhpGHHFC0CCAbnz51dqmAR6H%2BFGtIzQ60
If normies are on the jury then there is absolutely no hope. They will always let these guys off dont you realize that?
The big one is held back. . .Treason. . .now that's a crime that is capital !
Wonder if they (DS advisors) are trying to load as much damage on this guy and then have Biden pardon him.
There's nothing here that normies can't understand.
Normies just aren't going to care about a cybersecurity expert who worked for a Democratic POTUS candidate two elections ago being charged with something. That's pretty low down the totem pole to guarantee any sort of chain reaction, and political operatives being accused of stuff is pretty much the daily norm.
A charge is just an accusation, and an accusation isn't proof or conviction. It's just a charge.
It'll be the outcome of the trial that ultimately makes it into the normieverse, one way or the other. And even then, don't expect people to care unless there's a dramatic and loud reveal that makes it obvious someone big has been implicated in a way that is likely to result in viable legal action. Even if Sussman goes down, it isn't likely to exciting anyone if it doesn't show Obama or Clinton or someone big going on the next episode of the Durham Show.
Ultimately, we're all waiting to see what Durham will actually prove in court. I'm patient. I care far more about proof than accusations, and Durham will have a chance to present his proof.