I’ll bet this IT guy is sorry he ever got involved with the Clintons.
The only reason I can think of to not give him use immunity is because the DoJ doesn’t want to hear what he has to say.
[Update a few minutes later]
Hadn’t noticed the whole story. Apparently he wasn’t just a hired IT guy — he worked on her campaign.
No sympathy, then. Anyone who voluntarily associates themselves with this long-time criminal syndicate deserves whatever they get.
People with nothing to hide don’t take the 5th. The 5th is, after all, not a right to silence, but a right to not testify against himself. You can’t, for example, use the 5th to avoid testifying about a crime you witnessed someone else do (unless so doing would also implicate you).
My guess; the IT guy’s lawyer is angling for immunity in return for testimony (immunity defeats the 5th amendment – can’t take the 5th if you’re immune)
Congress has, in the past, granted immunity in return for testimony, so even if the DOJ won’t do its job, there’s an alternative path.
This is, very clearly, a criminal matter involving multiple felonies.
However, Democrats need not worry. All Hillary needs to do to clear this mess up is launch a much needed national debate on what the meaning of “is” is, along with a few statements of, “What difference, at this point, does it make?”.
This continued drumbeat on the part of the WaPo that Hillary isn’t under investigation, the security of her server is, is bullsh*t [1]. The FBI doesn’t investigate server security, it investigates people who are suspected of committing crimes – and I emphasize crimes, not civil infractions.
[1] “bullshit”
IMHO, the FBI is either seeking a felony indictment of the server (Grand Juries are famously claimed to be willing to indict a ham sandwich, so why not a server?) or, they are pursuing a felony indictment of the person or people who ordered and controlled said server.
I know which one of those two I consider the most likely, and it does not involve criminal charges against an inanimate object. 🙂
Unrelated investment advice; buy popcorn futures – demand for it is about to go way up.
“The only reason not to give him use immunity is if you really don’t want to hear what he has to say”
This dovetails with my theory for some time now. Everybody is misreading this “investigation” the goal is not to bring down Hillary, it’s to not find anything and exonerate her. This would support that.
I don’t disagree with your theory, but I don’t see how Hillary can shift her blame. I didn’t have a clearance, but I did have an SF-86 investigation, and I did have exposure and responsibility for Sensitive But Unclassified documents and ITAR controlled documents. I also received yearly training on the handling of those documents. It was pretty clear my requirements to self-report known unauthorized exposure of such documents, and that I would be personally responsible for failure to report such exposure.
Politically, Clinton can certainly try to shift blame, and people like Jim will be happy to support her. But legally, the IT guy and Clinton can both go to jail (and if anyone wants to prosecute Colin Powell or Karl Rove, they have my support). There seem to be plenty of people committing what appear to be felonies. I’m ok with them all serving time.