It was already known that he was going to plead the fifth to avoid self incrimination. Yesterday, Patrick Cunningham, the chief of the criminal division of the U.S. attorney’s office in Arizona, was excused from a deposition after refusing to give more than his name and title, Fox News reports:
Cunningham informed the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee through his attorney that he would use the Fifth Amendment protection after being subpoenaed last week to testify in front of congressional investigators regarding his role in the operation that sent more than 2,000 guns to the Sinaloa drug cartel. Guns from the failed operation were found at the murder scene of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in 2010.
Interesting solution in the comments:
I’m not a constitutional lawyer, not a lawyer of any kind, but it’s my understanding that Cunningham can be given immunity and remove the ability to “plead the fifth” because he won’t have any legal culpability (unless he perjures that testimony.)
Seems to me that would be the way to go, if Issa knows the real rats are at the top, not in the field.
Next question: Will Holder take the Fifth?
Pingback: US Attorney Patrick Cunningham Refuses to Give More Than his Name and Title To Congressional Investigators…More Subpoenas Coming « Nice Deb
Considering the recent history of bullshit prosecutions for alleged perjury, false statements, misleading government officials, and the like, it would be foolish to accept that immunity. Just say “no” when asked if you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Even if you’re held for contempt of court, it’ll be less serious than doing a year for making an honest misstatement which is treated as perjury.
Er, disregard. I was mixing up court trials and congressional hearings. I’m not sure what can be done in the latter, on either the government or the witness side.
It doesn’t matter what happens to any of the scum because the Won is going to pardon them all anyway.