The Federal Judge, Sullivan, overseeing the Judicial Watch lawsuit against the State Department, has requested that former Hillary Clinton Information Technology officer, Bryan Pagliano, explain the reasoning behind his intent to invoke Fifth Amendment protections in a non-criminal inquiry/deposition the judge previously ordered.
Lawyers for Bryan Pagliano previously asserted his intent to avoid answering questions in the court ordered deposition. Judge Sullivan apparently wants to know the details of the current immunity protection covering Pagliano as promised by the FBI investigators.
[From The Order] The deposition of non-party Bryan Pagliano is hereby postponed until further order of the Court. Counsel for Mr. Pagliano shall file a Memorandum of Law addressing the legal authority upon which Mr. Pagliano relies to assert his Fifth Amendment rights in this civil proceeding, including requisite details pertaining to the scope of Mr. Pagliano’s reported immunity agreement with the Government. Mr. Pagliano’s Memorandum of Law, along with a copy of his reported immunity agreement, shall be filed no later than Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. The parties are ordered to file responsive memoranda of law no later than Friday, June 10, 2016 at 12:00 p.m. Mr. Pagliano shall file a reply memorandum no later than Monday, June 13, 2016 at 5:00 p.m. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on June 3, 2016. (link)
Mr. Pagliano was previously given some form of immunity in exchange for his cooperation in the FBI investigation into the Clinton home-made communications system; the private email server etc. Mr. Pagliano has already given testimony to the FBI.
The move by Pagliano attorney’s to block the civil deposition is most likely due to the FBI not wanting any Clinton aide, or entity with direct involvement with the matter, to have an understanding of the details already in evidence (as revealed by Pagliano) during a criminal investigation. Especially if former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has yet to be interviewed.
The Sullivan order does not state the response would be under seal, meaning there is a possibility the FBI agreement with Pagliano, in exchange for his cooperation, could become a matter of public record.
(Via Politico) […] Details of Pagliano’s deal with prosecutors remain unclear, but the statement from Pagliano’s lawyers suggests the arrangement doesn’t completely preclude a criminal prosecution, although the attorneys did not say directly who might be charged in such a case.
It’s unclear what criminal liability Pagliano’s attorneys are concerned about, but he was on the State Department’s payroll and being paid privately by Clinton at the same time. The payments from Clinton made after he began working at State were not included in his personal financial disclosure, investigators say. (read more)