> So he should give up his 5th amendment right to fend off an accusation You're missing the point. The fifth just says that you can't have your silence held ag

> So he should give up his 5th amendment right to fend off an accusation You're missing the point. The fifth just says that you can't have your silence held against you. Once you answer the question by saying anything at all, then the answers can be used against you, especially if you're lying. I believe he's under oath in these proceedings. > None of the most relevant facts of the case have come to light. No, we're talking about the judge's statements, somebody who has seen all the evidence and is speaking as a professional jurist. And unlike the rest of the Uber accusations, he has gone on record with these statements after seeing some fairly strong documented evidence. The fact that we haven't seen it yet is immaterial.