President's Lawyer Giuliani Says Trumps Lies Don't Mean Anything Because They Are Not Under Oath
GIULIANI: He’s (Michael Cohen) changed his story four or five times.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So has the president.
GIULIANI: The president’s not under oath.
That exchange occurred yesterday of George Stephanopolous' ABC news show This Week.
Rudy Giuliani is of course, a lawyer representing the president of the United States , Donald Trump. Giuliani's purpose is widely believed to be to "muddy the water", to say so many ridiculous things in the national media that the public becomes confused, overloaded or apathetic.
Giuliani was once respected as "America's mayor" for his bucking up of the New York City (and the nation's) mood in the hours and days after the 9-11 terrorist attack that killed almost 3000 people. After leaving office Giuliani has toyed with running for president and built a security agency with clients in the middle east and elsewhere. In the most recent years he remains in national view as a toady and bullshitter on behalf of Donald Trump.
Giuliani says nothing the president says matters until he is under oath. Since he has not been under oath as president then nothing he says matters. Giuliani has also recently said "truth isn't truth", and something to the effect of only God can know what the truth is.
One good question could be - "who believes this idiocy?"
To try and preserve Trump's absurd presidency Giuliani has destroyed his own reputation. I hope at least Trump has paid him handsomely, although I doubt it.
Tags
Who is online
30 visitors
Rudy Giuliani isn’t doing his client in the White House any favors
Rudy Giuliani is the highest-profile member of Donald Trump’s legal defense team, though it’s not altogether clear whether the former mayor does any real legal work. Giuliani often seems to play more of a public-relations/media-spokesperson role for the president.
Which, all things considered, is a difficult dynamic to understand, because the New York Republican seems to constantly make things worse for his client by talking to the media.
On ABC News’ “This Week” yesterday, George Stephanopoulos noted that, according to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office, Michael Cohen “provided valuable information about Russia-related matters for its investigation.” It led to this exchange :
On the first point, it’s true that there is no statute covering “collusion,” per se – it’s more a political term than a legal one – but cooperating with a hostile foreign power to intervene in an American election is most definitely illegal .
But more importantly, what exactly did Giuliani mean, “It was over with by the time of the election”? In that sentence, what does “it” stand for?
There was also this exchange:
It’s not that simple. All available evidence suggests Russia stole Democratic materials and used WikiLeaks as part of its intelligence operation. If Roger Stone and Trump coordinated information about the release of Russia’s stolen documents, it would bring the president that much closer to the heart of the conspiracy.
This exchange about Michael Cohen also stood out.
Behold, the president’s lawyer suggesting on national television that the president may have lied to the American public, but so long as he wasn’t under oath, it doesn’t much matter.
Meanwhile, the former mayor also sat down with Fox News’ Chris Wallace yesterday, who asked if Special Counsel Robert Mueller wants to interview the president. “Good luck,” Giuliani replied , “Good luck.”
The host followed up, asking, “So, when you say ‘good luck,’ you’re saying no way, no interview?” Giuliani replied, “They’re a joke. Over my dead body, but you know, I could be dead.”
When Wallace asked again if investigators want to speak to Trump, Giuliani changed the subject.
Giuliani Almost Admits Trump Colluded and Committed a Crime
JONATHAN CHAIT DECEMBER 16, 2018In an interview yesterday, George Stephanopoulos asked President Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani if Roger Stone ever gave Trump a “heads-up” about forthcoming WikiLeaks email publications. “No, he didn’t, no,” he replied. But then Giuliani seemed to reconsider his certitude almost immediately. He blinked, and then softened his denial — “I don’t believe so” — before immediately transitioning into a conditional defense of the very charge he had been asked to deny: “But again, if Roger Stone gave anybody a heads-up about WikiLeaks’ leaks, that’s not a crime. It would be like giving him a heads-up that the Times is going to print something. One the — the crime, this is why this thing is so weird, strange. The crime is conspiracy to hack; collusion is not a crime; it doesn’t exist.”
If you understand the facts and the law in this case, this much should be clear: Trump is almost certainly guilty of both collusion and a crime. And Giuliani’s backpedalling defense reveals that he is no longer confident Trump’s denials will hold.
The Trumpian mantra, “collusion is not a crime,” is a misleading legalism. Think of “collusion” and “crimes” as two large circles in a Venn diagram with a small overlap. Trump is being investigated for many crimes, and his campaign obviously colluded with Russia in multiple ways. Some of the alleged crimes, the overlapping portion of the Venn diagram, involve cooperating with the Russian election intervention. At least one such crime has already been identified by the special counsel, back in July: “conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States.” Specifically, the indictment explained, the “object of the conspiracy was to hack into the computers of U.S. persons and entities involved in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, steal documents from those computers, and stage releases of the stolen documents to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election.”
Mueller’s investigation began by tying together the email hackers with Russian intelligence and WikiLeaks. Stone is the most obvious link in the chain that would connect Trump himself to the conspiracy. Stone, working through intermediaries, communicated with WikiLeaks during the election. Stone also spoke regularly with Trump throughout the campaign.
At the time that Stone’s reported contacts with WikiLeaks were occurring, the United States government had already identified Russia as the culprit in the hacking of Democratic emails. Trump recognized this fact by publicly calling on Russia to hack other missing Democratic emails.
Last month’s drafty offense of Jerome Corsi, one of the back-channel contacts between Stone and WikiLeaks, gave some hints of how the collusion worked. As Ryan Goodman and Bob Bauer explained, WikiLeaks had obtained a Democratic email that appeared (or could be twisted) to imply that the campaign had concerns about Hillary Clinton’s health. WikiLeaks let the Trump campaign know about its plan to release this email, and the Trump campaign accordingly circulated rumors about Clinton’s health in order to maximize the impact of this disclosure.
The only real mystery remaining in the conspiracy is whether Mueller can implicate Trump himself. This probably requires Mueller to prove that Stone informed Trump about his doings during the campaign. For Stone to have undertaken the effort to establish a back channel to WikiLeaks and not tell Trump about his good works would have been totally bizarre, knowing anything about how either man operates.
During the campaign, Stone was jockeying among many advisers for Trump’s ear and approval. Neither man has any discretion or respect for legal or ethical scruples. Stone has publicly vowed not to “roll” on Trump, insisting, “John Dean I am not,” a historical comparison that implies that Stone possesses incriminating information against the president of the United States. (John Dean was the former lawyer for President Nixon, and who testified against his boss’s criminal acts.)
Assuming Stone maintains the omertà — this is one of the few pieces of mafia lingo Trump has not yet used in public — Mueller would have to find evidence of their communication some other way. Maybe Trump told another one of his advisers who is now cooperating with Mueller. Or maybe some electronic record of the communication exists.
Giuliani’s comments seem to indicate that he knows that Trump did have a heads-up from Stone, but does not know if Mueller will be able to prove it. Hence his competing impulses to deny the accusation but to prepare a fallback defense in case that denial becomes inoperable. Giuliani’s argument to Stephanopoulos is that working with WikiLeaks would be just like talking with the New York Times . Of course, the New York Times does not routinely engage in criminal acts in order to obtain its news reports, and it is also not the tool of a hostile foreign intelligence service. Giuliani’s defense has retreated right up to the line where it crosses into a confession of guilt.
Really, REALLY, big yawn here John.....we know you can do better.
Do you agree that Giuliani is making a fool out of himself?
Totally
This is what occurs when one is desperate to have a sit at the WH table of influence and power. Mr. Win at all cost meets Mr. Win at all cost Extraordinaire and both keep sparking each other.
u spelled spanking wrong
HA!
I would like to say on the record that I find Rudy Giuliani creepy. This man has the same moral principals as his client......NONE. He sounds scattered and frankly acts like the typical slimy unscrupulous lawyer. Someone that would represent a mob boss without a second thought to who his client victimized.
That is what he reminds me of. A lawyer for a mob boss/crime syndicate.
This is what burns my toast to its core: your child/ren would not be taken seriously by the media, lawyers, courts, or the public if s/he/them can in talking like a mealy-mouth. This is not a game and we are not kids! In fact, parents rebuke their kids for lying and other acts of mischaracterizing and 'mishandling' the truth!
So how is this 'cute,' 'fun,' and 'clever'? Rudy Giuliani is exposing himself to be a low-down, shady, individual who speaks up for "white-collar" crime and does not care about justice. He does not deserve an "invite" to these television news shows!
Well said.
I love Cal's comments when he gets off the God stuff.
Who's Cal?
HA!
Lenny! The "god stuff" is me too! I am compelled to be true to myself! (Smile.)
It's me, PJ! I'm Cal. (Smile.)
Oh....hahahahaha, sorry. Hi Cal!
Howdy, PJ!!!
Psst: I was "Calbab" for nearly two years here before my recent 'transformation.'
Oh....okay, I guess I should pay more attention. Thanks for explaining.
No problem. I kind of "CB"-ed it without any fanfare. (Smile.)
I knew I recognized those posts..
Ahhh! (I told me friends upfront!)
Well, in that case... Sent you and PJ FR..
Done! Thank you, Sir!
Rudy is as demented as his #1 client. I look forward to the charges of conspiracy and obstruction to end this charade.
When you consider that Giuliani is a so-called 'first class attorney' advising President Trump it kind of points out the reckless nature of Trump's tweets!
This so-called, "President" or "Leader" has lied with abandon to the American public, and the sad, disgusting fact, is this country's citizens are taking to damn long to call Trump and "Bagdad Bob" Giuliani for messing with our collective minds!
Really, Donald? Law and Order? You and former "America's mayor' Giuliani are attempting to diminish and deflect DOJ and FBI from their day jobs as professionals—you give a damn about law and order?! Next, you will be sharing how much none of this is about you in any way!
The Trump has never taken an oath.
As far as 'the Rudy', apparently he hasn't either.
The only reality that matters is the fact that the Trump can not answer questions, because the Trump lives in a void created by the void of itself.
The is not an explanation of the thirty some per cent of the Trump base. Their destiny lies in the void of 'The Last Redoubt.'
"A void created by the void__itself." And this: "Truth in a world darkened by lies."*
Woo, now this is some deep soup we're cooking, bbl-1!
* The Last Redoubt (Online)