Smirking drug CEO antagonizes lawmakers after pleading the Fifth

Jackson

Gold Member
Dec 31, 2010
27,502
7,917
290
Nashville
Smirking drug CEO antagonizes lawmakers after pleading the Fifth

Embattled drug executive Martin Shkreli antagonized lawmakers on Thursday by smirking and posing for pictures during his first appearance on Capitol Hill even as he refused to answer questions about drug prices.

Shkreli, who was subpoenaed by the House Oversight Committee, repeatedly provoked lawmakers from both parties during his brief — and mostly silent — appearance.

One lawmaker, Rep. John Mica (R-Fla.), said Shkreli should be held in contempt for refusing to answer questions. “I don’t think I’ve ever seen the committee treated with such contempt,” Mica said.

Another Republican, Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), criticized Shkreli for his “childish, smart-aleck-ish smirks,” and blasted him out for posing for pictures while being asked a question from the panel’s top Democrat, Rep. Elijah Cummings (Md.)

“I just think it was totally ridiculous,” Duncan said.

Shkreli, the 32-year-old founder and CEO of Turing Pharmaceutical, made headlines in September for raising the price of Daraprim, a drug used to fight parasites, including in patients with HIV, from $13.50 per pill to $750 per pill after buying the rights to the drug.

He told lawmakers he would plead the Fifth Amendment and “respectfully decline” to answer questions to protect himself against self-incrimination for separate charges he is facing on securities fraud.

But within minutes of being escorted out of the hearing, Shkreli tweeted: “Hard to accept that these imbeciles represent the people in our government.”

His lawyer, who left with Shkreli about 45 minutes into the hearing, delivered a sharply worded statement calling the panel a “hostile forum.”

“He’s not the villain, he’s not the bad boy. I think at the end of this story, he’s a hero,” his lawyer said. “I think the only regrets he has are the unfair treatment he has received.”

After Shkreli read his statement pleading the Fifth Amendment, he was taunted by Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), as well as Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), for remaining silent on the stand after speaking so openly about drug prices in media appearances and online.

“What do you say to that single pregnant women who might have AIDS, who needs Daraprim to survive?” Chaffetz asked, prompting Shkreli to repeat a line from his lawyer about remaining silent.

“Do you think you’ve done anything wrong?” Chaffetz asked, and Shkreli again repeated the line about the Fifth Amendment.

Smirking drug CEO antagonizes lawmakers after pleading the Fifth

How many times has someone invoked the 5th amendment, only to get off of charges that they are obviously guilty of? What is the purpose of that amendment?


Shkreli raised the price of a life saving drug from $13.50 a pill to $750 a pill.
 
Last edited:
How many times has someone invoked the 5th amendment, only to get off of charges that they are obviously guilty of? What is the purpose of that amendment?

Damn that pesky Constitution! What's it for anyway? I have no idea. Maybe somebody from TV Land, like Donald Trump, knows.
 
I watched this and it was amazing.

This kid was smiling and smirking and looking bored the whole way through.

I've never seen anything like it.

Seriously, is there something wrong with him?
.
Unscrupulous! I am so tired of people thinking they are above the law! And he's going to get rich for being a terrible human being!
 
How many times has someone invoked the 5th amendment, only to get off of charges that they are obviously guilty of? What is the purpose of that amendment?

Damn that pesky Constitution! What's it for anyway? I have no idea. Maybe somebody from TV Land, like Donald Trump, knows.
So, stick with the question...what is the point of protecting someone when they have information that would incriminate them?
 
I watched this and it was amazing.

This kid was smiling and smirking and looking bored the whole way through.

I've never seen anything like it.

Seriously, is there something wrong with him?
.

He's a vulture, and he found an easy carcass in a simple, non-patented drug that can easily be made by others, if it wasn't for the snail's pace FDA procedures some other manufacturer would have to go through to be approved to begin manufacture.

He found a bottle-neck, and exploited it.
 
What law has he broken? He bought the rights to make this medication. Now he is overcharging. It's a terrible thing to do to those that need this medication but he bought it. He owns it. He could say he's never making another one if he wants to.
 
How many times has someone invoked the 5th amendment, only to get off of charges that they are obviously guilty of? What is the purpose of that amendment?

Damn that pesky Constitution! What's it for anyway? I have no idea. Maybe somebody from TV Land, like Donald Trump, knows.
So, stick with the question...what is the point of protecting someone when they have information that would incriminate them?
Your very presumption of guilt is exactly why we have a Fifth Amendment.
 
I watched this and it was amazing.

This kid was smiling and smirking and looking bored the whole way through.

I've never seen anything like it.

Seriously, is there something wrong with him?
.

It's called sociopathy. He's the Millennial Donald Trump.
 
Shkreli is accused of securities fraud, and not for price gouging.

He is accused of losing investor money and lying to them about it, and for illegally taking money from one of his companies to pay the losses in another.

The burden of proof is on the government.
 
Pharmaceuticals have the cures. But the money's in treatment. Cures are bad for business. Big Pharm is pure evil. This stuff shouldn't surprise anyone.
 
cts
How many times has someone invoked the 5th amendment, only to get off of charges that they are obviously guilty of? What is the purpose of that amendment?

Damn that pesky Constitution! What's it for anyway? I have no idea. Maybe somebody from TV Land, like Donald Trump, knows.
So, stick with the question...what is the point of protecting someone when they have information that would incriminate them?
Your very presumption of guilt is exactly why we have a Fifth Amendment.
IN investigations, we need facts. When the witness knows facts and refuses to tell the court, panel, etc,. they are withholding that information. Justice is indeed blind when it allows criminals to scamper from crimes on that amendment. I still do not see the positive aspect of that amendment.

Look at Shrekeli today. Smirking and antagonizing the panel. Everyone knows he's withholding evidence and he's loving it.
 
Who the hell does he think he is, Hillary Clinton?!
 
cts
How many times has someone invoked the 5th amendment, only to get off of charges that they are obviously guilty of? What is the purpose of that amendment?

Damn that pesky Constitution! What's it for anyway? I have no idea. Maybe somebody from TV Land, like Donald Trump, knows.
So, stick with the question...what is the point of protecting someone when they have information that would incriminate them?
Your very presumption of guilt is exactly why we have a Fifth Amendment.
IN investigations, we need facts. When the witness knows facts and refuses to tell the court, panel, etc,. they are withholding that information. Justice is indeed blind when it allows criminals to scamper from crimes on that amendment. I still do not see the positive aspect of that amendment.
Then you have no historical education or knowledge whatsoever.
 
cts
How many times has someone invoked the 5th amendment, only to get off of charges that they are obviously guilty of? What is the purpose of that amendment?

Damn that pesky Constitution! What's it for anyway? I have no idea. Maybe somebody from TV Land, like Donald Trump, knows.
So, stick with the question...what is the point of protecting someone when they have information that would incriminate them?
Your very presumption of guilt is exactly why we have a Fifth Amendment.
IN investigations, we need facts. When the witness knows facts and refuses to tell the court, panel, etc,. they are withholding that information. Justice is indeed blind when it allows criminals to scamper from crimes on that amendment. I still do not see the positive aspect of that amendment.
Then you have no historical education or knowledge whatsoever.
Educate me, friend.
 

Forum List

Back
Top