• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Ivanka and Don Jr. ignoring subpoena from New York Attorney General

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
fskimospy said:
Sure, but what does that even have to do with the topic of the thread? Whether it is civil or criminal has no impact on the validity of the subpoenas or the Trump children's requirement to comply. Was taj just having a stroke or something?
Click to expand...

It's ironic watching a fascist like Taj call other people nazis about a subject he is nothing but clueless on, and supports his party's thought leaders evading the justice system.

GQP'ers are irredeemable soulless vessels.
 
Greenman said:
Doesn't the fifth amendment also apply in a civil case? In a wrongful death suit it doesn't seem like admitting you shoved a knife in a guys eye would be a good idea.
I honestly don't know the answer.
Click to expand...
You can use pleading the 5th against the defendant in a civil case. You can't in a criminal case. It's up to the juror.
 
fskimospy said:
The 5th amendment always applies, but claims of blanket immunity from testifying never apply. Trump can be and will be forced to give testimony but when he does so he must elect to invoke the 5th amendment against every individual question. In a civil case deciding to do that has consequences though as under New York law the jury is allowed to draw negative inferences against you for doing it. (ie: if you're invoking the 5th that means the plaintiffs are right about how your conduct was bad/illegal/whatever)

So basically the Trumps can invoke the 5th if they think it helps them get out of prison but it also makes it easier for the NYS AG to destroy the Trump Organization.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much how I thought it worked. Thanks for clearing that up.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
Only a fucking nazi like you and cytg think the the Right against self incrimination and the rest of our Constitutional rights are stupid.
Click to expand...
Once they show up in court they can invoke their 5th amendment rights! Until then this has nothing to do with self-incrimination or their constitutional rights!

Are you really that brain dead???
 
hal2kilo said:
You can use pleading the 5th against the defendant in a civil case. You can't in a criminal case. It's up to the juror.
Click to expand...
You also have the right to plead the Fifth when you are a witness in a federal criminal case. Much like with a defendant, a witness may refuse to answer any questions that might tend to implicate them in a crime. This right exists even when the potentially incriminating testimony has nothing to do with the case at hand.

Should I Plead the Fifth in My Federal Crimes Case? | Houston Defense (dougmurphylaw.com)
 
fskimospy said:
Yes, as always I suspect the goal here is not to win but to delay for as long as possible.

The courts have really exposed a weakness where well resourced bad faith actors can gum up the works for years with no expectation of winning on the merits.
Click to expand...
It's not really a weakness, it is our courts have gotten away from the rules of appeals, so those rules are not enforced. Appeals where never intended for "I don't agree with the ruling". But sadly, that is the majority of appeals now days.

So the weakness is really the courts themselves, or rather, the politicization of the judges who are no longer enforcing the rules/laws/constitution, and allowing people to abuse the system allowing them to drag things out for ever.

We also gotten away from locking people up for violating and ignoring subpoenas. Use to be an automatic bench warrant was issued for your arrest by the judges if you ignored a subpoena.
 
Last edited:
NWRMidnight said:
It's not really a weakness, it is our courts have gotten away from the rules of appeals, so those rules are not enforced. Appeals where never intended for "I don't agree with the ruling". But sadly, that is the majority of appeals now days.
Click to expand...
No one appeals because they don't agree with the ruling. They always have some legal reason to appeal. It is just in cases involving a lot of money or powerful people it is often so flimsy as to be a transparent delay tactic. These tactics do not work for Average Joe accused of crime. In general only about 10% of cases get an appeal.

So the weakness is really the courts themselves, or rather, the politicization of the judges who are no longer enforcing the rules/laws/constitution, and allowing people to abuse the system allowing them to drag things out for ever.
Click to expand...
The weakness is that the courts are influenced too much by money and power.
We also gotten away from locking people up for violating and ignoring subpoenas. Use to be an automatic bench warrant was issued for your arrest by the judges if you ignored a subpoena.
Click to expand...
Still do if you are not rich and/or famous. If any normal person tried this bullshit they would be in jail until they agreed to comply.
 
SMOGZINN said:
No one appeals because they don't agree with the ruling. They always have some legal reason to appeal. It is just in cases involving a lot of money or powerful people it is often so flimsy as to be a transparent delay tactic. These tactics do not work for Average Joe accused of crime. In general only about 10% of cases get an appeal.


The weakness is that the courts are influenced too much by money and power.

Still do if you are not rich and/or famous. If any normal person tried this bullshit they would be in jail until they agreed to comply.
Click to expand...

I disagree! If that was true, arguments wouldn't change at the appeal hearings, which has nothing to do with the actual appeal based on an error (violation of current laws and/or violation of the constitution) misconduct, new evidence, and/or violation of their rights, during the original trial. They keep changing their argument/defense in the appeal to try something different because they didn't agree with the ruling in the previous court, and the appeals court does not hear an argument on why the original ruling was invalid. And they keep doing it until the court sides with them or they make it all the way to the SCOTUS and gets shot down , or the SCOTUS siding with them, ending with a completely different argument and case that was originally introduced in the first court, and NOTHING to do with an actual legal reason they appealed to original ruling.

You are right about it being due to money, but that is only because they have the money to throw at the Lawyers to keep filing frivolous appeals. The Power you speak if is all political based for the most part. Yes there are some directly bought off Judges, but most are bough off via politicization and not via criminal avenues, which does not refute what I said, but supports it.
 
Last edited:
My understanding of the 5th is that you cannot use it to blanketly refuse testimony. The question has to reasonably lead to risk of appearing to self-incriminate. Also in civil proceedings it is permissible to make an adverse inference from failure to answer a question. Which essentially puts Eric's testimony in the obstruction category, making them go through more effort to force him to respond to non-incriminating questions.
 
interchange said:
My understanding of the 5th is that you cannot use it to blanketly refuse testimony. The question has to reasonably lead to risk of appearing to self-incriminate. Also in civil proceedings it is permissible to make an adverse inference from failure to answer a question. Which essentially puts Eric's testimony in the obstruction category, making them go through more effort to force him to respond to non-incriminating questions.
Click to expand...
Highly doubt they are just fishing for answers. They should be very deliberate and precise with their questions. So not like “is your name Eric Trump?” “I plead the 5th!!!”
 
interchange said:
My understanding of the 5th is that you cannot use it to blanketly refuse testimony. The question has to reasonably lead to risk of appearing to self-incriminate. Also in civil proceedings it is permissible to make an adverse inference from failure to answer a question. Which essentially puts Eric's testimony in the obstruction category, making them go through more effort to force him to respond to non-incriminating questions.
Click to expand...

That's one of the amusing parts of this. The Trumps have a fourth-grader's sense of the law where "I plead the fifth" gets them out of having to answer any questions, but that view might actually make things worse by confirming their obstructionism and suggesting that they have something big to hide.
 
eelw said:
Highly doubt they are just fishing for answers. They should be very deliberate and precise with their questions. So not like “is your name Eric Trump?” “I plead the 5th!!!”
Click to expand...

I couldn't find the full text after a brief search. If you look at what is shown in the tweet, he clearly indicated he would plead the 5th for all further questions, and he was asked immediately after that "When you joined The Trump Corporation, what was your title?" which he declined to answer. Clearly he invoked the 5th on questions he did not have a legal right to decline to answer.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
Only a fucking nazi like you and cytg think the the Right against self incrimination and the rest of our Constitutional rights are stupid.
Click to expand...

But...but...but...



and, of course...

www.businessinsider.com

Eric Trump and Allen Weisselberg invoked their 5th Amendment rights more than 500 times in Trump Organization probe, court filing says

Both Eric Trump and Allen Weisselberg sat for depositions in 2020, where they each invoked their Fifth Amendment rights over 500 times, a filing said.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com
 
interchange said:
My understanding of the 5th is that you cannot use it to blanketly refuse testimony. The question has to reasonably lead to risk of appearing to self-incriminate. Also in civil proceedings it is permissible to make an adverse inference from failure to answer a question. Which essentially puts Eric's testimony in the obstruction category, making them go through more effort to force him to respond to non-incriminating questions.
Click to expand...
You can invoke the 5th for any reason period!
 
JEDIYoda said:
prove me wrong with facts...as in links........thx
Click to expand...

https://www.carltonfields.com/insig...ng-number-five-in-a-civil-proceeding-what-you

The general rule is that a blanket assertion of the Fifth Amendment during a deposition is impermissible. United States v. Bowe, 698 F.2d 560, 566 (2d Cir. 1983) (“[A] blanket assertion” of a Fifth Amendment privilege is insufficient); United States v. Bates, 552 F.3d 472 (6th Cir. 2009) (finding that long standing rule that a blanket assertion is insufficient); United States v. Schmidt, 816 F.2d 1477, 1482 (10th Cir. 1987); United States v. Thornton, 733 F.2d 121, 125-26 (D.C. Cir. 1984); United States v. Drollinger, 80 F.3d 389, 393 (9th Cir. 1996); United States v. Goodwin, 625 F.3d 693, 701 (5th Cir. 1980); General Dynamics Corp. v. Selb Manufacturing Co., 481 F.2d 1204, 1212 (8th Cir. 1973).

In fact, a witness invoking the privilege must do so for each question. United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1355 (11th Cir. 1991). Then, if counsel wishes to compel the testimony and/or test the validity of the assertion, the matter is taken before the court on a motion to compel. The court must review the assertions of the privilege on a question-by-question basis. Id. This is sometimes accomplished in an in camera proceeding wherein the witness is given the opportunity to substantiate his claims of the privilege and the district court is able to consider the questions asked and the documents requested. See United States v. Roundtree, 420 F.2d 845, 852 (5th Cir.1969) (“The district court may then determine by reviewing ... records and by considering each question whether, in each instance, the claim of self-incrimination is well-founded.”).
Click to expand...
 
You know...? THIS IS NOT OUR PROBLEM !!!!!!!

All of this crap being reported in the news, and the way it is always reported seems only to outrage the general public. Get us mad.
This news of outrage is not "our" problem, here.
WE HAVE LAWS, THEY HAVE LAWS to deal with stuff like subpoena dodging and contempts of courts and contempts of congress. WE don't need to figure this out... THEY have an obligation to figure this out. They, being the officials enforcing our laws and in our courts.

So, when the Trump family and or the Trump associates in and out of congress dare thumb their nose at laws and at courts and at congress, then just F-ing hold them accountable. We have people called attorney generals in our government and in the state governments who's job it is to go after people like the Trump's. When they fail to do their job and when they refuse or drag their feet in doing their job, then what is the average John Doe out there expected to do? Take up arms and turn violent? Turn insurrectionist?
No...
We have laws and we have people put in place to handle this stuff, to handle the law breakers.
So don't worry about it. It's not our problem. We expect the laws of justice to take care of it. If they don't or if they won't, then we can get mad at the ballot box.

If you allow all of this crap to get to you, and to tie your stomach up into knots wondering how the hell and why the hell this is allowed to happen i.e. the law breaking by the Trump's and their "friends", don't go there.
let the people who are paid to worry about this, worry about this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top