this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
293 points (93.7% liked)

politics

19183 readers
5342 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 176 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The “set up” was to ask incriminating questions to someone too dumb to plead the 5th.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

My understanding is they can't plead the 5th. Well they can but the judge can assume the worst if they do use it.

Apparently because it's civil not criminal it works different.

[–] [email protected] 64 points 1 year ago (3 children)

He might have still been better off pleading the 5th and losing the civil trial than he will be testifying, probably losing the civil trial anyway, and also opening himself to potential criminal liability.

[–] Windex007 38 points 1 year ago

Better to be thought a criminal than to open your mouth and remove all doubt

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

True, but lucky for us, he's a dumbshit.

[–] TheBat 5 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago

They lost the civil trial already by willful disregard of the courts requests and blatant misdirection. This whole show is just to determine how much they owe. While it might be pedantic, it is fairly critical to getting the story right as to what is happening.

It’s why the questioning is going the way it is going. They could go deeper on certain questions, but the facts are already mostly clear. It doesn’t stop them from focusing on who of this gang might have lied.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, guilt can be inferred when pleading the 5th in a civil trial because you are effectively refusing to refute anything said against you.