The Problem With the 5th Amendment

 

We've recently been treated to the spectacle of Anthony Fauci invoking the 5th amendment 111 times and the head of ActBlue invoking it 47 times as well as dozens of others each of whose invocations left Americans seething inside and muttering that this isn't 'justice' as that term is typically understood.

And they're right.

Imagine being called into the boss' office and being asked  "Did you tell Jeff it was okay to pay this invoice?"  and replying that you respectfully decline to answer on grounds that doing so might get you fired?  No, you can't imagine that, can you?  Yet when Fauci is called before his boss (or, more appropriately, the Board of Directors) that's exactly how he answered their questions.

Now, true, your boss can only fire you, but Congress can refer you for prosecution and that might mean prison time among other things, so the 5th amendment protects you from putting yourself in prison, but...

Congress is not asking such questions on behalf of Congress.  They're asking on behalf of the people who pay the bill, the taxpayers.  And they're asking about job-related events while government employees were being paid to do some job.

What to do?  What to do?

I have a solution, and I can't understand why no one else has offered it before, because it's simple and straight-forward:

When someone is offered a taxpayer-funded position, whether in government or external to it, that offer of employment must come with the understanding. explicit and in writing if needs be, that the employee voluntarily surrenders their 5th amendment right against self-incrimination for any matter that concerns the job for which they are/were employed and paid.

The CEO of ActBlue is still protected, but Anthony Fauci wouldn't be.  Lois Lerner (remember her?) could be asked  "Did you treat some groups of tax filers differently based on their political leanings?"  and she would not be able to avoid answering and would have to answer 'yes' or 'no' risking prosecution either for malfeasance or for perjury.

Is this the solution to the problem of the 5th amendment getting in the way of the administration of justice?  If this were implemented now or soon, would it be the automatic sump pump the swamp has needed all along?

Yes, the number of people applying for or accepting tax-funded employment might suffer a decline, but the ones then considering government employment 'too risky' are exactly the ones we don't want working for the government.

Problem solved?  Maybe.