photo #9318088

Janet Elaine ParksPeople keep bringing up "Trump pled the Fifth 440 times" as if it rebuts Fauci pleading the Fifth 111 times this week. It doesn't, and here's why the comparison falls apart once you look at the actual context of each.Trump's 440 came from a 2022 civil deposition, part of the New York Attorney General's civil fraud investigation into the Trump Organization. That's a civil case, not a criminal trial and not sworn congressional testimony. Invoking the Fifth in a civil deposition is a routine defensive step attorneys commonly advise, precisely because civil cases, unlike criminal ones, allow a judge to weigh the silence against you. It's an expected, ordinary part of how that kind of proceeding plays out.Fauci's 111 happened yesterday, at a Senate hearing, under subpoena, in a congressional oversight investigation. He has testified before Congress more than 250 times across his career and had never once pleaded the Fifth, until this week, days after his own private diary was released.Here's the detail that actually separates the two situations: Fauci has already received a pardon covering his pandemic-era conduct. Trump has not, for this matter. Real Supreme Court precedent (Brown v. Walker, 1896) holds that once someone accepts a pardon for an offense, they can no longer invoke the Fifth for that same conduct, since a pardon is supposed to remove the legal exposure the privilege exists to protect against. Sen. Josh Hawley raised exactly this point to Fauci directly, on the record.So the honest question isn't "well, Trump did it too." It's this… if a pardon is supposed to mean there's nothing left to prosecute, what is refusing to answer 111 questions actually protecting against?Whataboutism isn't an answer. It's a way of not answering the question at all.