Rudy Giuliani admits he made 'false' statements about Georgia 2020 election workers
Rudy Giuliani admitted in a court filing that he made "false" statements regarding Georgia poll workers in the 2020 election and that he no longer contests the factual allegations in their defamation lawsuit against him.
The court filing, released early Wednesday morning, details how Giuliani "does not dispute for purposes of this litigation, that the statements carry meaning that is defamatory." However, the former New York City mayor, according to the filing, still maintains that his statements are "constitutionally protected."
Atlanta poll workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss have sought "severe" sanctions and an outright victory in a defamation case against Giuliani after he failed to produce communications related to former President Donald Trump's 2020 election fraud claims.
Freeman and Moss asked U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell in court filings earlier this month to rule "default judgment" in favor of their case as a result of Giuliani's failure to turn over an exchange between himself and Trump adviser Boris Epshteyn.
The two election workers said they had been subjected to relentless attacks since 2020, when Giuliani and Trump cited them, sometimes by name, to fuel their since-debunked claims of election fraud. They seek an unspecified amount in damages, claiming Giuliani's actions caused severe emotional distress and put them in danger.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/rudy-giuliani-admits-false-statements-georgia-2020-election-workers
Someone should let Rudy know:
https://twitter.com/sethjlevy/status/1684309443205386240
Quote from: ZenMode on July 26, 2023, 06:45:30 AMRudy Giuliani admits he made 'false' statements about Georgia 2020 election workers
Rudy Giuliani admitted in a court filing that he made "false" statements regarding Georgia poll workers in the 2020 election and that he no longer contests the factual allegations in their defamation lawsuit against him.
The court filing, released early Wednesday morning, details how Giuliani "does not dispute for purposes of this litigation, that the statements carry meaning that is defamatory." However, the former New York City mayor, according to the filing, still maintains that his statements are "constitutionally protected."
Atlanta poll workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss have sought "severe" sanctions and an outright victory in a defamation case against Giuliani after he failed to produce communications related to former President Donald Trump's 2020 election fraud claims.
Freeman and Moss asked U.S. District Court Judge Beryl Howell in court filings earlier this month to rule "default judgment" in favor of their case as a result of Giuliani's failure to turn over an exchange between himself and Trump adviser Boris Epshteyn.
The two election workers said they had been subjected to relentless attacks since 2020, when Giuliani and Trump cited them, sometimes by name, to fuel their since-debunked claims of election fraud. They seek an unspecified amount in damages, claiming Giuliani's actions caused severe emotional distress and put them in danger.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/rudy-giuliani-admits-false-statements-georgia-2020-election-workers
How does that go again, oh yeah, LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: taxed on July 26, 2023, 03:02:12 PMSomeone should let Rudy know:
https://twitter.com/sethjlevy/status/1684309443205386240
Dismissal? Why? Why let them off the hook? And, if you get a dismissal, surely he would counter sue to defamation because, you know, he wasn't lying and can backup his claim.
Quote from: ZenMode on July 26, 2023, 04:00:37 PMDismissal? Why? Why let them off the hook? And, if you get a dismissal, surely he would counter sue to defamation because, you know, he wasn't lying and can backup his claim.
Many many cases are dropped for various reasons, not just because there is not enough evidence. But it does look like YOUR source is lying.
Quote from: Possum on July 26, 2023, 04:07:01 PMMany many cases are dropped for various reasons, not just because there is not enough evidence. But it does look like YOUR source is lying.
I don't disagree that cases are dropped. But, if he has the evidence he claims to have, why drop it. Nail them to the wall and clear his name wow exposing the voter fraud in Georgia.
Quote from: ZenMode on July 26, 2023, 04:21:21 PMI don't disagree that cases are dropped. But, if he has the evidence he claims to have, why drop it. Nail them to the wall and clear his name wow exposing the voter fraud in Georgia.
One would think a lawyer such as Giuliani would know when his case is going nowhere and the time comes to put it behind. I would like to see all those guilty punished. I would rather see Trump back in the white house. I think efforts need to be there until that happens. There will be time after Trump is elected to go after the guilty. Maybe even go after YOUR sources which publish lies.
Quote from: Possum on July 26, 2023, 04:30:25 PMOne would think a lawyer such as Giuliani would know when his case is going nowhere and the time comes to put it behind. I would like to see all those guilty punished. I would rather see Trump back in the white house. I think efforts need to be there until that happens. There will be time after Trump is elected to go after the guilty. Maybe even go after YOUR sources which publish lies.
If he can support his claim against those two women, why would his case go nowhere?
Quote from: ZenMode on July 26, 2023, 05:06:12 PMIf he can support his claim against those two women, why would his case go nowhere?
Zen, I can't answer that. Look up his email and ask him. Just don't trust your usual sources for the correct answer.
Quote from: ZenMode on July 26, 2023, 04:00:37 PMDismissal? Why? Why let them off the hook? And, if you get a dismissal, surely he would counter sue to defamation because, you know, he wasn't lying and can backup his claim.
I love your fails.
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1684297014777987077
Quote from: Possum on July 26, 2023, 03:28:15 PMHow does that go again, oh yeah, LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Double "LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE".
Right, so if he can prove his claims, why isn't he?
Quote from: ZenMode on July 26, 2023, 06:36:56 PMRight, so if he can prove his claims, why isn't he?
You are the last person who should be talking about claims. You never back yours up. I have lost track on the number of times you made a claim and never backed it up when pressed for it.
Quote from: Sick Of Silence on July 27, 2023, 04:50:37 PMYou are the last person who should be talking about claims. You never back yours up. I have lost track on the number of times you made a claim and never backed it up when pressed for it.
:lol: :lol: And when he does back it up, it turns out to be full of B.S.
Quote from: Sick Of Silence on July 27, 2023, 04:50:37 PMYou are the last person who should be talking about claims. You never back yours up. I have lost track on the number of times you made a claim and never backed it up when pressed for it.
If you have a full house, you don't fold. Giuliani is spinning this as a win, but it's folding.
Quote from: Possum on July 27, 2023, 06:15:13 PM:lol: :lol: And when he does back it up, it turns out to be full of B.S.
He has backed it up?
:confused:
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 (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defamation) 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
:bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl
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? :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl
God, you're a Gullible Twit! :rolleyes:
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."
Quote from: Possum on August 31, 2023, 05:45:09 AMSeems like the NYTIMES got another story less than true or to put it another way, they lied again.
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!!!
Zen doesn't want the truth, never has, and never will!
Quote from: Possum on August 31, 2023, 05:45:09 AMSeems like the NYTIMES got another story less than true or to put it another way, they lied again.
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!!!
I'm not sure, but delaying and being uncooperative seems to be the norm for his defamation cases. I suspect it's because, as was already documented, he's a liar and he's trying to delay the inevitable drop of the legal hammer.
'The dog ate my homework': Lawyers skewer Giuliani for 'delay tactics and misrepresentations' in Smartmatic defamation caseLawyers for a voting machine company suing Rudy Giuliani, Fox News, and others over false statements made after the 2020 presidential election say that the former mayor has repeatedly failed to participate in the case — and that "enough is enough."
Voting technology firm Smartmatic is seeking sanctions against Giuliani over the ongoing delay amid orders compelling him to cooperate by providing non-privileged documents as part of the discovery process. Smartmatic detailed Giuliani's apparent recalcitrance in a motion filed in New York state court Monday.
"'The dog ate my homework.' 'I have to wash my hair.' 'I can't go out, I'm sick,'" the motion begins. "Since the dawn of time, people have made up excuses to avoid doing things they do not want to do. This is exactly what Giuliani has done here."
Smartmatic says that Giuliani has spent months making up excuses to get out of his discovery obligations, violating court orders in the process.
"To date, Giuliani has not produced a single non-public document responsive to the discovery requests Smartmatic issued fourteen months ago," the motion says. "Giuliani and his counsel must be held accountable for their repeated and blatant delay tactics and misrepresentations. Smartmatic's patience should not be punished with further delay and excuses. Enough is enough."
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/the-dog-ate-my-homework-lawyers-skewer-giuliani-for-delay-tactics-and-misrepresentations-in-smartmatic-defamation-case/
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 06:23:51 AMI'm not sure, but delaying and being uncooperative seems to be the norm for his defamation cases. I suspect it's because, as was already documented, he's a liar and he's trying to delay the inevitable drop of the legal hammer.
'The dog ate my homework': Lawyers skewer Giuliani for 'delay tactics and misrepresentations' in Smartmatic defamation case
Lawyers for a voting machine company suing Rudy Giuliani, Fox News, and others over false statements made after the 2020 presidential election say that the former mayor has repeatedly failed to participate in the case — and that "enough is enough."
Voting technology firm Smartmatic is seeking sanctions against Giuliani over the ongoing delay amid orders compelling him to cooperate by providing non-privileged documents as part of the discovery process. Smartmatic detailed Giuliani's apparent recalcitrance in a motion filed in New York state court Monday.
"'The dog ate my homework.' 'I have to wash my hair.' 'I can't go out, I'm sick,'" the motion begins. "Since the dawn of time, people have made up excuses to avoid doing things they do not want to do. This is exactly what Giuliani has done here."
Smartmatic says that Giuliani has spent months making up excuses to get out of his discovery obligations, violating court orders in the process.
"To date, Giuliani has not produced a single non-public document responsive to the discovery requests Smartmatic issued fourteen months ago," the motion says. "Giuliani and his counsel must be held accountable for their repeated and blatant delay tactics and misrepresentations. Smartmatic's patience should not be punished with further delay and excuses. Enough is enough."
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/the-dog-ate-my-homework-lawyers-skewer-giuliani-for-delay-tactics-and-misrepresentations-in-smartmatic-defamation-case/
He gave the reason why, I noticed you just kinda glossed over that part. The FBI already has what it needs, there is one reason and one reason only, the FBI has not turned it over, IT DOES NOT FIT THE AGENDA!!!
And yet Giuliani's lawyers kept promising to turn over things. Weird. Giuliani had no problem finding the doc where he admitted to being a liar. :rolleyes:
"Smartmatic could see the lie loud and clear," the motion says (citations omitted). "Giuliani and his counsel would promise to produce documents, promise it would be done by a date certain, and then fail to meet that commitment. Immediately after failing to meet the production deadline, Giuliani and his counsel would concoct a new (or repeat an old) excuse for failing to produce documents. Recognizing this now familiar pattern, Smartmatic gave Giuliani one last chance to produce documents by August 7, 2023. Giuliani, of course, missed this deadline too."
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 07:32:09 AMAnd yet Giuliani's lawyers kept promising to turn over things. Weird. Giuliani had no problem finding the doc where he admitted to being a liar. :rolleyes:
"Smartmatic could see the lie loud and clear," the motion says (citations omitted). "Giuliani and his counsel would promise to produce documents, promise it would be done by a date certain, and then fail to meet that commitment. Immediately after failing to meet the production deadline, Giuliani and his counsel would concoct a new (or repeat an old) excuse for failing to produce documents. Recognizing this now familiar pattern, Smartmatic gave Giuliani one last chance to produce documents by August 7, 2023. Giuliani, of course, missed this deadline too."
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 07:32:09 AMAnd yet Giuliani's lawyers kept promising to turn over things. Weird. Giuliani had no problem finding the doc where he admitted to being a liar. :rolleyes:
"Smartmatic could see the lie loud and clear," the motion says (citations omitted). "Giuliani and his counsel would promise to produce documents, promise it would be done by a date certain, and then fail to meet that commitment. Immediately after failing to meet the production deadline, Giuliani and his counsel would concoct a new (or repeat an old) excuse for failing to produce documents. Recognizing this now familiar pattern, Smartmatic gave Giuliani one last chance to produce documents by August 7, 2023. Giuliani, of course, missed this deadline too."
So why don't they ask the FBI for the devices they took from him? Must not fit the agenda.
Quote from: Possum on August 31, 2023, 10:35:49 AMSo why don't they ask the FBI for the devices they took from him? Must not fit the agenda.
One reason.... Because what they are looking for isn't in digital format?
Second reason: Giuliani got his devices back over a year ago
What? Your news sources didn't tell you that? :rolleyes:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-returns-electronic-devices-former-trump-attorney-giuliani-lawyer-2022-08-03/
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 12:35:24 PMOne reason.... Because what they are looking for isn't in digital format?
Second reason: Giuliani got his devices back over a year ago
What? Your news sources didn't tell you that? :rolleyes:
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-returns-electronic-devices-former-trump-attorney-giuliani-lawyer-2022-08-03/
Doesn't matter, they had it!!! It was in their possession. For a judge to be asking for it after the FBI gave it back is out of the norm. Had the D.A. asked for it, maybe I could see a reason, but not the judge.
Quote from: Possum on August 31, 2023, 12:40:08 PMDoesn't matter, they had it!!! It was in their possession. For a judge to be asking for it after the FBI gave it back is out of the norm. Had the D.A. asked for it, maybe I could see a reason, but not the judge.
They had his devices. That doesn't mean they has ALL information. Either way, it's Giuliani's job to provide what is required for discovery. The FBI isn't his secretary.
Do you ever hold any MAGA people accountable for their actions?
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 01:50:10 PMThey had his devices. That doesn't mean they has ALL information. Either way, it's Giuliani's job to provide what is required for discovery. The FBI isn't his secretary.
Do you ever hold any MAGA people accountable for their actions?
DAMN!!!! NOBODY claimed the FBI was his secretary, so stop using strawmen. But even the FBI knows how to copy any information they will need for trial. And yes, they had it all, everything that was on his devises, they had! The FBI works with the D.A., they never would have given anything back UNLESS there was nothing left on it for the trial. At this point there is no evidence that the judge even looked at it to see if that was what she wanted. Obviously the communication with her, the FBI, and the D.A. was nonexistent.
they never would have given anything back UNLESS there was nothing left on it for the trial. (repeated it in case you missed it the first time.)
Quote from: Possum on August 31, 2023, 02:51:23 PMDAMN!!!! NOBODY claimed the FBI was his secretary, so stop using strawmen. But even the FBI knows how to copy any information they will need for trial. And yes, they had it all, everything that was on his devises, they had! The FBI works with the D.A., they never would have given anything back UNLESS there was nothing left on it for the trial. At this point there is no evidence that the judge even looked at it to see if that was what she wanted. Obviously the communication with her, the FBI, and the D.A. was nonexistent.
they never would have given anything back UNLESS there was nothing left on it for the trial. (repeated it in case you missed it the first time.)
Again, we don't know that everything being requested was digital and it is not the FBI's job to be his secretary. Giuliani had 14 months to turn over the info and he
chose not to. Now he get to face the consequences.
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 03:23:14 PMAgain, we don't know that everything being requested was digital and it is not the FBI's job to be his secretary. Giuliani had 14 months to turn over the info and he chose not to. Now he get to face the consequences.
What he is now facing is a very political judge. Even you know that.
Quote from: Possum on August 31, 2023, 03:45:02 PMWhat he is now facing is a very political judge. Even you know that.
Who gave him over a YEAR to get his shit together!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Seriously. How much longer would a non-political judge give him? 5 years? 10 years? He might be dead by then.
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 03:57:06 PMWho gave him over a YEAR to get his shit together!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Seriously. How much longer would a non-political judge give him? 5 years? 10 years? He might be dead by then.
If the FBI and the D.A. were fine with giving the devises BACK, the judge should have stayed out of it. Or did you forget she is supposed to be impartial? It is too obvious to everyone else this is a political witch hunt.
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 03:23:14 PMAgain, we don't know that everything being requested was digital and it is not the FBI's job to be his secretary. Giuliani had 14 months to turn over the info and he chose not to. Now he get to face the consequences.
So, tell us what devices they want, and what would be a non digital device?
Quote from: Solar on August 31, 2023, 06:07:57 PMSo, tell us what devices they want, and what would be a non digital device?
they're requesting documents
Quote from: Solar on August 31, 2023, 06:07:57 PMSo, tell us what devices they want, and what would be a non digital device?
They had the devices in their hands, looked it all over, decided with the D.A. nothing there and gave them back. Now it is a big deal and they are going after him for not returning the devices they returned???????????? And Zen wants to believe this is not a witch hunt? :lol:
Quote from: Possum on August 31, 2023, 06:15:06 PMThey had the devices in their hands, looked it all over, decided with the D.A. nothing there and gave them back. Now it is a big deal and they are going after him for not returning the devices they returned???????????? And Zen wants to believe this is not a witch hunt? :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Rudy stated it would cost $300.000 to retrieve the info requested, so I wonder why she doesn't simply subpoena the FBI for the evidence they have in a "safe".
Quote from: Solar on August 31, 2023, 06:17:55 PM:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Rudy stated it would cost $300.000 to retrieve the info requested, so I wonder why she doesn't simply subpoena the FBI for the evidence they have in a "safe".
NAILED IT!They are going to drain his money until they can get a guilty verdict! This is an Obama appointed Judge whose sole purpose is to transform America.
Quote from: Possum on August 31, 2023, 06:25:32 PMNAILED IT!
They are going to drain his money until they can get a guilty verdict! This is an Obama appointed Judge whose sole purpose is to transform America.
BINGO! Communist political persecution of the competition.
So, they're asking for documents. An innocent person should be jumping at the opportunity to clear his name but, ooooh, that's right. He already admitted to being a liar. :rolleyes:
Quote from: ZenMode on August 31, 2023, 09:52:52 PMSo, they're asking for documents. An innocent person should be jumping at the opportunity to clear his name but, ooooh, that's right. He already admitted to being a liar. :rolleyes:
Is this the best your side has, a 'Liable" case? :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl :bigl
You guys haven't had a single good day in years, and this is all they have to go after, is a big bad Conservative said bad things about me. :rolleyes:
`
You guys are seriously fuckin pathetic and especially you for latching onto this nothing story, as if your side depended on it to stay relevant.
Oh Wait! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Quote from: Sick Of Silence on July 26, 2023, 06:15:56 PMDouble "LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE".
Lutz???? Zero credibility for years
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on September 01, 2023, 06:15:48 PMLutz???? Zero credibility for years
Yep, Lutz and his roommate butt buddy McCarthy, are locked at the hip in supporting Establishment control.
Just a different style of fascism.