When it comes to tRump leaning on the fifth amendment to avoid answering any incriminating statements against himself, it appears the fifth amendment does have its limits when dealing with high crime situations and based on evidence against the individual who has the right to remain silent but does not have the right to avoid a grand jury motion, etc. This also appears to relate to the concept of a murderer, in particular, being interrogated or so-called interviewed at invoking their fifth amendment rights to remain silent but based on the incriminating evidence against them at saying they want to see their lawyer, does not prevent them from being challenged in court and tried based on that argumentative evidence gathered:
Fifth Amendment
The Fifth Amendment creates a number of rights relevant to both criminal and civil legal proceedings. In criminal cases, the Fifth Amendment guarantees the right to a grand jury, forbids “double jeopardy,” and protects against self-incrimination. It also requires that “due process of law” be part of any proceeding that denies a citizen “life, liberty or property” and requires the government to compensate citizens when it takes private property for public use.
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fifth_amendment
Not a trial.
