Former Clinton aide pleads the Fifth, not cooperating with investigators

Former Clinton IT specialist Bryan Pagliano has informed the House Benghazi Select Committee that he will be invoking his Fifth Amendment right to refuse to answer questions regarding the secret private email server that Hillary Clinton used while Secretary of State.

However, in an August 31 letter to Congress, Pagliano’s attorney said the former 2008 campaign staffer who installed and managed Clinton’s personal server and left his IT job at the State Department in February 2013, the same month Clinton stepped down as secretary, would “respectfully assert his Fifth Amendment right” before the Benghazi Select Committee.

“The matters for which Mr. Pagliano’s testimony and documents are being sought by the Select Committee are also the subject of investigative activity by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice,” the letter said.

Despite using the investigations by the FBI and DOJ as the reason to plead the Fifth, it has been reported that Pagliano is refusing to cooperate with investigators from either probe. Apparently this follows a pattern of refusals to cooperate that go back as far as the original inspector general investigation back in the early summer.

Pagliano had worked with Clinton going back to at least 2006, serving on her original presidential campaign then later at the State Department with continuing duties overseeing the email server. Last week Clinton claimed to have used the secret private email server going back at least to her time as senator from New York:

 “I did all my business on my personal email [in the Senate],” Clinton said. “I was not thinking a lot when I got in [to the State Department]. There was so much work to be done. We had so many problems around the world. I didn’t really stop and think what kind of email system will there be.”

“This was fully above board, people knew I was using a personal email, I did it for convenience. I sent emails that I thought were work related to people’s dot gov accounts,” she added.

This last statement is a direct contradiction to evidence previously revealed that showed that Clinton and her aides had sent information that would later be determined to be classified to at least six other people’s private email addresses, including non-government employee Sidney Blumenthal, the longtime ClintonWorld loyalist who was blocked from taking a position at State by the Obama Administration due to rumors he had spread about President Obama during the 2008 campaign.

As the Baltimore Sun said today “There is a smoking gun. In fact, there’s a whole smoking arsenal”.


[Fox News][Yahoo News][NBC News][Baltimore Sun][Photo Credit: The Daily Signal]


  1. marbeth Ramirez

    Really?? Yet another smoking gun. I really am sick of the whole email fiasco. A waste of time and money just to keep Hillary for being elected. Is everyone that fearful of a woman POTUS? It only seems to be the media that is overly concerned. If anyone chooses to plead the fifth that is their right. How does that reflect on Hillary. She is going to testify. Publically.. She has nothing to hide. Stop bashing and bullying the only candidate who is qualified for the job.

    1. Kyung Trotter

      No. We just don’t want a liar or another person who’ll do the Electric Slide on the Constitution.

    2. Michael Bernard
      Michael Bernard

      Are we to assume that her next testimony will be any more helpful or forthright than her last one?
      “Frankly, at this point, what difference does it make?”

      But silly us I guess. We are to coronate her because SHE IS A WOMAN and by god “the only candidate who is qualified for the job”.

      Up until now I had not been fully aware that sitting and former governors, sitting and former elected Senators and business people with a wealth of executive experience were somehow VASTLY out-experienced by a twice elected (but only one full term served, and .3 of the other served while most of her time spent running for president) Senator and former Secretary of State.

      SOMEONE SHOULD TELL JOHN KERRY! HIS RESUME FAR EXCEEDS HILLARY CLINTON’S BY THOSE STANDARDS! Kerry was a senator for a much longer time than Hillary, and the argument surely could be made that he has actually ACCOMPLISHED something as Secretary of State……Whether that something (Iran Deal) is any better than letting the Middle East go to oblivion is a matter of taste I guess.

      Your argument that criticism of Hillary Clinton’s behavior as Secretary of State is rooted in anti-woman bias is itself biased. Somewhat reminiscent of what could be expected for the next 4-8 years every time someone lodges a completely valid criticism of “our nation’s first female president”.

      Remind you of anyone?


    3. Jim Johnston

      Marbeth, it would be fantastic to have a woman in the White House, it just cannot be a proven liar such as Hillary Clinton. She has qualifications? She was a terrible S of S proven by our poor relationships with many countries around the world. She didn’t protect her staff, how do you think she’ll do protecting Americans. Really, are you serious? You need to get your priorities straight and worry about the future of our Country.

  2. Gareth Brody

    How is she qualified exactly?

    BECAUSE she is a female perhaps? Isn’t that a bit of a supremacist position to take?

    Twice elected senator? Lots are as qualified as that including Boxer, Feinstein among others (which I have no issues with)

    Former Secretary of State? I’d take Condi Rice for President any day.

    Former first lady??? Since when does being married to someone qualify you for their job? So I guess Gisele could play QB for the Patriots and Mrs. Buffet could take over the reigns of Berkshire Hathaway too, right?

    Just what has Hillary accomplished in any of the above mentioned roles? Voted for Iraq War resolution? Reset with Russia? The spiraling of the Arab Spring into complete chaos and AT LEAST 3 failed states that were at least stable before her tenure?

    I do not think she is qualified to run a hot dog stand.


  3. David Gillespie

    She was either reprimanded or lost her licence over scandal during Watergate. Her lies and deceptive practices didn’t JUST START. I for one don’t want Obama 2.0 running this country. And giving her the presidency just because she’s a woman? It is wrong to deny a black person the presidency based on their color. It is also wrong to not hold them responsible for that same reason.

  4. Phil Kraker

    I cannot believe I am hearing the people supporting Hillary, “Still” after what has come out that no one can now deny! Frankly, I am just as amazed at the lack of concern over the Benghazi panel. Why did they not demand answers for those and other discrepancies? I could see why before the actual evidence was made public but now there is no excuse! And this from the woman who was so insistent that President Nixon, a very good president, be impeached and removed and worked overtime to that end to affect it. The Republicans made that possible and asked real probative questions in was his own party that made the removal possible. Does anyone imagine this happening today with the democrat party?

  5. Pingback: Classified Hillary Clinton emails rise to at least 1340, denies requesting unlawful communication

Comments are closed.