Rudy Giuliani rides to the rescue! Of Stormy Daniels and James Comey.

0
218

Did you ever catch a toddler that did something wrong? You tell them that you know they did it, and they burble out a totally nonsensical explanation of why it couldn’t have been them. Then, you patiently explain why you know it was them, and they come up an excuse so lame that even the teddy bear they’re holding won’t buy it. Right about now, we should all be starting to feel like the teddy bear.

From what I understand, Giuliani’s law firm has clients because of his “name,” and his connections in city government. That’s strange. I didn’t know that so many New Yorker’s had so many problems with the Streets and Sanitation Department, since, due to his recent performance, they must be the only city agency that will return his calls. Trump’s other new lawyer, Emmet Flood, comes from a “white shoe law firm.” Giuliani? Apparently there’s a “$20 shitkicker law firm” category as well.

Rudy The Rube personified the phrase “out of the mouths of babes” on Hannity, and then followed up by making things even worse the next day on Fox and Friends. But he reached the pinnacle in Presidential sabotage with his belated “correction,” written and released to keep people from asking him immediately afterwards why he was still fucking things up even worse.

Giuliani tried to clean up three different “oil spills” with his clarification, but instead of tossing absorbent pellets on them, he just took a wet rag and smeared them around in bigger circles. Let’s look at each one, just for kicks, shall we?

There is no campaign violation. The payment was made to resolve a personal and false allegation in order to protect the President’s family. It would have been done in any event, whether he was a candidate or not.

Rudy, bubbie, come on! There are a couple of things that are just basically wrong here. For one, the campaign violation thingy would have been easier to sell if Giuliani himself hadn’t gone on FOX’s morning news version of Romper Room and admitted that the payment was made to affect the election outcome. A $130,000 payment to prevent a scandal is likely an “in kind” campaign contribution, and illegal. If Trump repaid Cohen, that might be legal, since there is no limit to what a candidate can contribute to his own campaign, but that would require him to put that payment on his FEC filing statement, which Trump did not do. Either way, you’re looking at a likely violation of campaign finance law.

The second problem is more subtle, but could cause even more trouble for Giuliani himself. Giuliani, speaking personally, made a direct reference to a “personal and false allegation.” Apparently Rudy Giuliani loves litigation so much that he wants to make sure that Michael Avenatti never has to take another client, because Stormy Daniels will have him in court until the day he dies. Avenatti has already sued Michael Cohen for defamation, for calling Ms Clifford a liar. Then, he slapped a defamation suit on Glorious Bleater for calling the release of the forensic sketch of Daniels’ mystery thug a “con job.” Waddaya wanna bet Avenatti is in court next week, slapping Giuliani with a defamation suit for that “false allegation” line? And the funny thing is, it’s a totally self inflicted wound. All Giuliani had to do is to drop the “and false” from the statement, and he was fine. Saying “A personal allegation” cast no inference of truth or deceit. But, that’s Rudy for ya.

My references to timing were not describing my understanding of the President’s knowledge, but instead, my understanding of these matters.

OK, the only bar I ever passed was because it was already closed and locked up for the night, but I have had a few professional interactions with lawyers, so I know of which I speak. I think we can all agree, when any of us hire a lawyer, our overriding concern should be that he have his fucking facts straight! If I want to know what my lawyer thinks, I’ll take him out for a beer and ask him, but when he’s officially representing me, I want him to do as much research as necessary, or ask me however many questions it takes, until his shit is firmly wired together. That lame ass excuse was nothing short of legal malpractice.

It is undisputed that the President’s dismissal of former Director Comey – an inferior executive officer – was clearly within his Article II power

*SIGH* I’ve been following this stuff pretty closely, and so far, I don’t recall anybody seriously doubting that Trump had the “right” to fire Comey. What is in contention was the possibility of a corrupt reason for the firing. Let’s make this as easy as 1-2-3 to understand. We’ll say I own a car repair shop called Shake-N-Brake. I can fire any employee I want, but I can’t fire him for being black, or Hispanic, or Muslim, or a she. I can fire an employee for stealing from the till, but I can’t fire him for telling the cops that I’m gouging customers for unnecessary repairs. That’s the whole issue here. It wasn’t the firing, it was the intent of covering up possible criminal violations with the firing. Giuliani, never one to be satisfied with a simple pooch screw, had to gild the lily;

Recent revelations about former Director Comey further confirm the wisdom of the President’s decision, which was plainly in the best interests of our nation.

Wow. Just wow. By this statement, I can only assume Giuliani ia referring to the fact that that mental midget, Devin Nunes, releasing the “Comey Memo’s” only served to buttress everything Comey has said all along. Namely, that Trump was obsessed by the Russia investigation, asked Comey to drop the Flynn investigation, asked Comey for an oath of personal loyalty, and ultimately fired Comey over his continued digging into the Russia investigation. I’m not so sure that it was “in the best interest of the nation” for Trump to fire Comey, but it sure as hell was in Trump’s best interest to get that guy outta there soonest.

There is one thing in this ongoing Giuliani shit show of a legal defense that is starting to worry me more and more. In the appellate process, there is a perfectly acceptable appeal based on “competence of counsel.” Basically, it means that the defendant’s lawyer was so fucking stupid, that the defendant had no realistic chance of a competent defense and a fair trial. And if the antics of that doddering puddlehead Giuliani keep up much longer, you can almost start to smell that particular newspaper wrapped dead fish being prepared to drop on an appellate judge’s lap. From the minds of madmen.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support Joseph "Murfster35" Murphy and PolitiZoom on Patreon!

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of