I don't see anything in those quotes where I proclaim to be an expert on the Fifth Amendment.

In the first one, I went and read the Fifth Amendment and didn't see any language in it requiring you to be guilty to assert it.

In the second quote, I relied on this for my statement: "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." In this context, my statement was accurate and required no expertise or enhanced knowledge.

So, if actually reading and quoting the text of the Fifth Amendment is my assertion that I know the contours of waiver and invocation, then you must think that first graders are experts in puppy dogs and butterflies.

This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 1:39 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by LSURussian

Member since Feb 2005

126977 posts

Posted on 3/5/14 at 1:41 pm to FalseProphet

quote:
I don't see anything in those quotes where I proclaim to be an expert on the Fifth Amendment.

You were offering your opinion on how the 5th amendment works, just like others in this thread.

You know the "others"?? They are the ones you accused of being "experts" although none of them proclaimed themselves to be an expert, just like you didn't.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by NC_Tigah

Carolinas

Member since Sep 2003

124272 posts

Posted on 3/5/14 at 1:48 pm to FalseProphet

quote:
I went and read the Fifth Amendment and didn't see any language in it requiring you to be guilty to assert it.

The issue is one's stated assertion UNDER OATH to be innocent, not only of crimes, but of doing anything wrong. Then UNDER OATH refusing to answer any questions on the grounds it might incriminate her.

Creates a logical conundrum.
Don't you agree?

1 ...

Report Post

Political Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board