Why couldn't the White House party-crasher answer any questions at all?

[Cliffy]

The 5th Amendment privilege doesn’t work the same way in front of Congress as it does in a courtroom.

The basic idea, and this applies to all sorts of privileges, is that you can’t just use a privilege to keep quiet about stuff that makes you look bad, while being willing to ignore the privilege and answer when it’ll make you look good. So if you have a privilege, divulging some privileged matter will waive it (or at least, will waive it w/r/t every question about that subject). Ergo, if you want to invoke your privilege at all, you have to use it to somethng like the fullest extent possible.

During the HUAC period, it was considered that answering any question would waive the privilege. I don’t know exactly the history of that legal doctrine, but it’s what had been established. So it’s not that this guy is being obstinate. It’s that he has a constitutional right not to testify, and the way the law is structured, he must engage that right fully – if he gives any answer, he (at least arguably) loses his ability to object to any question.

–Cliffy

[friedo]

@The_Second_Stone

For example, in Congress, the lawyers whisper in the ear of the witness instead of objecting out loud in many instances. Lawyers cannot whisper in the ear of a client in a state court setting, that is coaching the witness, a strict no-no. But in Congress, nobody does anything about it and it is a great show.

Who would they “object” to? There’s no judge in a congressional committee to tell the Congresscritters what questions they may ask. The only action a lawyer can take in that circumstance is to tell his client how to answer, if it all.

[sweeteviljesus]

So if a Congresscreature asks if he intends to assert his 5th Amendment rights to every question, can he answer yes to that or does he have to invoke the 5th again?