Quote from: Possum on July 27, 2023, 06:15:13 PM  And when he does back it up, it turns out to be full of B.S.

He has backed it up?

 

Below is a link to the doc he signed.  In summary, he's saying "I'm not denying that I lied about these two women, but it's ok because it was Constitutionally protected speech".


https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720.84.2.pdf

Quote from: ZenMode on July 31, 2023, 08:00:42 AMBelow is a link to the doc he signed.  In summary, he's saying "I'm not denying that I lied about these two women, but it's ok because it was Constitutionally protected speech".


https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720.84.2.pdf

nope, he has stated he did not lie.

Quote from: Possum on July 31, 2023, 09:06:49 AMnope, he has stated he did not lie.

Then why is he signing court documents stating that state he won't dispute they were false IF they are actually true?

Quote from: ZenMode on July 31, 2023, 10:01:47 AMThen why is he signing court documents stating that state he won't dispute they were false IF they are actually true?

You made the accusation. You need to provide proof.

Quote from: taxed on July 31, 2023, 12:11:29 PMYou made the accusation. You need to provide proof.

I did on a previous post.  Here's the link again.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720.84.2.pdf

Quote from: ZenMode on July 31, 2023, 12:45:54 PMI did on a previous post.  Here's the link again.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720.84.2.pdf

Where did he say he lied? Please provide the snippet or retract.

Quote from: taxed on August 08, 2023, 08:37:58 PMWhere did he say he lied? Please provide the snippet or retract.

You are unlikely to see the word lied in a court document. If you don't think he's admitting to lying, what do you think the document he signed is saying?

If I publicly accuse somebody of being a murderer, and then I signed a document saying that those claims were false, I am admitting that I lied by calling them a murderer.

Let's break down the court doc he signed:

1. Defendant Giuliani concedes solely for purposes of this litigation before this Court and on Appeal: that Defendant Giuliani made the statements of and concerning Plaintiffs, which include all of the statements detailed in Plaintiffs Amended Complaint, ECF No. 22 at §§57-101 and he does not dispute for purposes of this litigation, that the statements carry meaning that is defamatory per se;

He admits what he said was defamatory.  Defamatory means you're saying/writing/claiming something damaging about someone that is not true.

2. That Defendant Giuliani, for the purposes of this litigation only, published those statemnents to third parties;

In other words, he told his lies to other people.

3.That Defendant Giuliani, for the purposes of this litigation only,does not contest that, to the extent the statements were statements of fact and otherwise actionable, such actionable -factual statements were false. This stipulation does not affect Giuliani' s ability to seek setoff, offset or settlement credit, or his argument that his statements are constitutionally protected statements or opinions or any applicable statute of limitations, or that Giuliani's statements, in fact, caused Plaintiffs any damages, and the amount of any alleged damages which Giuliani's statements may have caused or any other legal defense not expressly waived by this Stipulation;

In other words, he lied, but his lies are Constitutionally protected speech.

That is all directly from the court doc he signed.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720/gov.uscourts.dcd.238720.84.2.pdf

'More holes than Swiss cheese': Judge rips Giuliani after finding him liable for defamation


A federal judge's finding that Rudy Giuliani defamed two Georgia election workers he falsely accused of fraud was accompanied by a scathing order.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell entered a default judgment against the former Donald Trump campaign lawyer – which means he didn't answer the charges against him or didn't attend hearings – and ordered him to pay more than $130,000 in attorneys' fees. She faulted Giuliani for stalling or outright refusing to turn over evidence to the plaintiffs' attorneys for discovery as required by law.

"Yet, just as taking shortcuts to win an election carries risks — even potential criminal liability — bypassing the discovery process carries serious sanctions, no matter what reservations a non-compliant party may try artificially to preserve for appeal," Howell wrote in her ruling.

https://www.rawstory.com/amp/rudy-giuliani-defamation-2664658143

QuoteBeryl A. Howell is a federal judge on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.013 She was appointed to the court on December 27, 2010, and her term as chief judge ended on March 17, 2023.0 As chief judge, she supervised federal grand juries in the District, including for the Mueller special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and investigations into attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election.3 Howell has repeatedly green-lit Justice Department requests to pursue information about former President Donald Trump's actions, from his top advisers and lawyers, and even inside the White House. She will be succeeded by James "Jeb" Boasberg, a fellow Barack Obama appointee and one-time Brett Kavanaugh law school roommate who's well-known in Washington.2

Who says justice is blind.  https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/politics/chief-judge-howell-boasberg/index.html


And no zen, nobody is surprised by this judges ruling. Don't tell me you are.

Quote from: Possum on August 30, 2023, 04:40:35 PMWho says justice is blind.  https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/politics/chief-judge-howell-boasberg/index.html


And no zen, nobody is surprised by this judges ruling. Don't tell me you are.

I suspect this ruling has more to do with the fact that Giuliani admitted he lied about them and was dragging his feet in the case.

Quote from: Possum on August 30, 2023, 04:40:35 PMWho says justice is blind.  https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/16/politics/chief-judge-howell-boasberg/index.html


And no zen, nobody is surprised by this judges ruling. Don't tell me you are.

once you have admitted, in writing, that you repeatedly lied about somebody, you are basically acknowledging that you are going to have to be financially responsible for those lies. At the point that you are admitting financial responsibility, it's perfectly normal to want to delay that responsibility. The judge just held him accountable for those delays.

Quote from: ZenMode on August 30, 2023, 04:57:19 PMI suspect this ruling has more to do with the fact that Giuliani admitted he lied about them and was dragging his feet in the case. once you have admitted, in writing, that you repeatedly lied about somebody, you are basically acknowledging that you are going to have to be financially responsible for those lies. At the point that you are admitting financial responsibility, it's perfectly normal to want to delay that responsibility. The judge just held him accountable for those delays.

No, this judge has a history of being political. But what the hell, lets just say you might be right, with her background for prejudice, her ruling is tainted. But reality says, Giuliani has stated several times he did not lie. I believe him a hell of a lot more than the judge. Too bad she does not have a record that is not filled with political actions. Justice blind my ass.

Quote from: ZenMode on August 30, 2023, 03:46:11 PM'More holes than Swiss cheese': Judge rips Giuliani after finding him liable for defamation


A federal judge's finding that Rudy Giuliani defamed two Georgia election workers he falsely accused of fraud was accompanied by a scathing order.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell entered a default judgment against the former Donald Trump campaign lawyer – which means he didn't answer the charges against him or didn't attend hearings – and ordered him to pay more than $130,000 in attorneys' fees. She faulted Giuliani for stalling or outright refusing to turn over evidence to the plaintiffs' attorneys for discovery as required by law.

"Yet, just as taking shortcuts to win an election carries risks — even potential criminal liability — bypassing the discovery process carries serious sanctions, no matter what reservations a non-compliant party may try artificially to preserve for appeal," Howell wrote in her ruling.

https://www.rawstory.com/amp/rudy-giuliani-defamation-2664658143

                     
Let me give you an example of what is known as an opinion piece in editorializing a story.

'More holes than Swiss cheese'

But we're supposed to overlook that and read the article?                                  

God, you're a Gullible Twit!

Quote from: ZenMode on August 30, 2023, 03:46:11 PM'More holes than Swiss cheese': Judge rips Giuliani after finding him liable for defamation


A federal judge's finding that Rudy Giuliani defamed two Georgia election workers he falsely accused of fraud was accompanied by a scathing order.

U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell entered a default judgment against the former Donald Trump campaign lawyer – which means he didn't answer the charges against him or didn't attend hearings – and ordered him to pay more than $130,000 in attorneys' fees. She faulted Giuliani for stalling or outright refusing to turn over evidence to the plaintiffs' attorneys for discovery as required by law.

"Yet, just as taking shortcuts to win an election carries risks — even potential criminal liability — bypassing the discovery process carries serious sanctions, no matter what reservations a non-compliant party may try artificially to preserve for appeal," Howell wrote in her ruling.

https://www.rawstory.com/amp/rudy-giuliani-defamation-2664658143

Seems like the NYTIMES got another story less than true or to put it another way, they lied again.

QuoteA federal judge ruled Wednesday that Rudy Giuliani is legally liable for defaming two Georgia election workers who became the subject of conspiracy theories related to the 2020 election that were amplified by Donald Trump in the final weeks of his presidency. In an unsparing, 57-page ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell said Giuliani had flagrantly violated her orders to preserve and produce relevant evidence to the election workers, Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss, resulting in a "default" judgment against him. She also ordered him to pay Freeman and Moss "punitive" damages for failing to fulfill his obligations.

What was the evidence she wanted? It was on his phones, his computers, laptops, etc.
So WHY were they devices not turned over, THE FBI TOOK THEM!!!

QuoteThe FBI took every electronic device in my apartment and my law office," Giuliani said at a May hearing in the suit. Indignantly insisting that he was not trying to deny the plaintiffs access to evidence related to their claims, he said: "I've been dealing with this for 50 years. I understand the obligation. ... There's nothing I want to hide. I'd like them to see everything. ... Not being perfect doesn't mean you're deleting things. I don't delete things."