[staticautomatic]

Once you invoke the 5th you cannot be compelled to talk or testify against yourself. Full stop. In your post above you said "they can subpoena you," which they can't. You said in that case "you do need to answer questions," which you don't. And you also said you'd have to answer questions "at trial, on the stand," which you don't.

[mirimir]

IANAL, but I believe that the 5th Amendment applies on a per question basis. You can't just say that you won't answer any questions.

> To sustain the privilege, it need only be evident from the implications of the question, in the setting in which it is asked, that a responsive answer to the question or an explanation of why it cannot be answered might be dangerous because injurious disclosure could result.'' [emphasis added]

https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment5/annotation07.htm...

[staticautomatic]

You're obviously just going to keep dancing around and not admit your error.

Suffice it to say-- one last time-- you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself. Period. End of story. How many times you may end up invoking your right to not testify against yourself, and in what settings, is entirely beside the point.

[mirimir]

I never said that "you cannot be compelled to testify against yourself".

I said:

> ... you do need to answer questions.

Your answer may be "I am exercising my 5th amendment right not to answer." But you do need to answer. Simply being silent is not enough to avoid a contempt judgment.

See https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/when-how-invoke-your...

[staticautomatic]

That is incorrect. You don't have to answer the cops' questions in any way at all. You don't have to say "I'm exercising my 5th amendment right...". Prosecutors also can't force you to say anything, including "I'm exercising my 5th amendment right...", in private or in court. They can't even call criminal defendants to the stand. The thing you linked to doesn't support your assertions, either.