GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS SHOULD BE PROSECUTED FOR "TAKING THE FIFTH"
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS SHOULD BE PROSECUTED FOR “TAKING THE
FIFTH”
By Domenick J. Maglio PhD. Traditional Realist
Government workers are servants for the people. When
congress requests pertinent information about a federal investigation all
government officials have the obligation to assist the process in order to
uncover the truth. “Taking the Fifth” obstructs and impedes congressional
members from establishing accountability in the people’s government.
This is a different situation than in an individual’s Fifth
Amendment rights not to be forced to testify against himself. “Taking The
Fifth” by citizens protects them from being coerced by government enforcement
members to make false statements to incriminate themselves. The Fifth Amendment
protects citizens from being abused by the politically powerful. Without the
Fifth Amendment the person would be at the mercy of dishonorable and corrupt government
officials.
Our founding fathers studied history and knew the British
system of law and justice used an inquisitor method of questioning. This system
allowed browbeating confessions out of the accused by requiring them to answer
rapid-fire questions. This questioning technique of suspects increases the
possibility of false, self-incriminating statements, unconsciously or
consciously to end the terrifying process. Our Fifth Amendment protects
citizens from this intimidating interrogation.
In no way should taking the 5th protect a public
servant from using his position to subvert investigations into corrupt
practices of self, fellow members or superiors. The unwillingness to answer
simple and direct questions to which the person should know the answer is a
dereliction of duty as a government official. These negative acts impact the
public right to accountability of its government officials.
In our current political establishment government officials
have used the right of the Fifth Amendment to stonewall congressional
investigations. John Sepulveda, a veteran’s administration official took the 5th
concerning his two extravagant waste of tax dollars conferences. Patrick
Cunningham invoked the 5th concerning the “fast and furious”
transporting of 2000 guns over the border to Mexico. A Solyndra official
pleaded the 5th concerning the fraudulent $535 million loan from
Obama’s stimulus package. Greg Roseman, a deputy IRS director took the 5th
regarding his awarding the largest contract to his friend. Lois Lerner, of the
IRS, was involved in targeting conservative groups for withholding or
prolonging applications for tax-exempt status. She took the 5th
repeatedly throughout the congressional hearings, retired and is receiving her
full pension. Hillary Clinton’s information technology specialist, Brian
Pagliano, took the 5th even after receiving congressional immunity.
Paul Cambatta wiped Hillary’s server clean with “bleach bit” two weeks after
congress requested all emails be preserved and invoked the 5th 125
times in a deposition for Judicial Watch. Two of Hillary’s lawyers, Cheryl
Mills and Heather Samuelson, got immunity for turning over the laptop computers
although they proceeded to take the 5th. Incredulously the head of
the Justice Department, Attorney General of the USA, Loretta Lynch, pleaded the
5th on the secret Iran $1.7 billion ransom payments. She also met
with Bill Clinton days before FBI director James Comey’s refusal to prosecute
Hillary Clinton for her well-documented email scandal. Hillary Clinton, herself
deleted 33,000 of her own emails and had memory loss, responding, “I don’t
remember” throughout the congressional Benghazi investigation, obstructing it.
The “Taking of the 5th” in a government
investigation should at the least result in the termination of the person’s
position. Under the law, it should be illegal to participate in bilking
citizens out of their tax dollars by using it illegally or covering up
information to protect another government official.
The “honest service law” allowed investigators the latitude
to punish government employees for dereliction of duty. In 2010 the Supreme
Court ruled this statute was too vague and narrowed the definition to an
outright bribe to be able to prosecute any government employee under this
provision. This statute should be rewritten to provide some limitations of
government officials who are not providing their services for the interest of
the public. The Supreme Court should reexamine this statute to provide citizens
some firm restrictions on keeping out-of-control corrupt government officials
in check. The people have the right to see their justice system punish the
powerful government elite for corruption in an equal manner as any other
citizen.
These government elites should not be allowed to hide behind
the protection of the 5th Amendment when they are performing their
official duties as government employees. There should be significant
consequences for any government employee taking the 5th, lying by
omission for anything involved with government business.
The automatic loss of government positions including
benefits and pension will help to keep the officials on the straight and narrow
path. This will put everyone who works for the government on notice that they are
not entitled to own their position in perpetuity. They will be placed on notice that their job
is conditional on doing honest service to the people by following the rule of
law.
The use of the 5th Amendment to shield corrupt
government policies and behavior is an unconscionable example of the political
ruling class’s brazen disrespect for the people’s right to an honorable
republic with integrity.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home