Gee … does the Department of Justice offer immunity to potential witnesses for routine “security reviews”? Bryan Pagliano, who declared his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent when the FBI sought to question him about Hillary Clinton’s secret e-mail server, will have to start talking soon, thanks to the DoJ’s decision to protect him from potential prosecution in exchange for his testimony:
The Justice Department has granted immunity to the former State Department staffer who worked on Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private email server as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official.
The official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009.
As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents will likely want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said.
Ahem. The DoJ does not offer immunity to “wrap up” an investigation. If the investigation needs to be “wrapped up,” at least as in closing it down, grants of immunity simply aren’t necessary. After all, there’s no need to protect a recalcitrant witness from prosecution when no prosecution is being planned or considered. Without a case to make on someone else, why bother offering immunity at all? They could just ignore Pagliano much more easily.
DOJ does not give immunity without something valuable from a potential target like Bryan Pagliano. The situation just got more precarious.
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) March 3, 2016