This will (promise) be uncharacteristically (for me) short. Tonight’s lesson is K.I.S.S. – Keep It Simple Stupid! Because the news is making it too complicated.
There has been a fair amount of reporting today both on TV and in print about Special Counsel Jack Smith’s apparently having taken an interest in Rudy Giuliani’s drinking habits. Or more specifically how wasted Rudy was (or maybe not) during crucial consultations with Trump r..e. promoting the Big Lie and/or Jan. 6. This one from Rolling Stone is a fairly comprehensive look at the matter.
The article notes that prosecutors aren’t typically concerned with people’s drinking habits but in this case it’s relevant because as they put it ” it could help demonstrate that Trump was implementing the counsel of somebody he knew to be under the influence and perhaps not thinking clearly.” That’s putting things nicely. But both from TV pundit lawyers and in the article an even more dense way of describing the relevance is (again from Rolling Stone):
“In order to rely upon an advice of counsel defense, the defendant has to, number one, have made full disclosure of all material facts to the attorney,” explains Mitchell Epner, a former Assistant United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey. “That requires that the attorney understands what’s being told to them. If you know that your attorney is drunk, that does not count as making full disclosure of all material facts.”
Whew! Talk about burying, or completely obscuring the lede!
I’m going to make this really simple to understand. It comes down to TWO things, one of which has gotten no mention in all this:
- Trump got plenty of conflicting advice. In addition to plenty of his own appointees in agencies other than DOJ (I’ll get to them) Trump was told the election was free, fair and very competently run across the country. That the results were sound. Accurate. Basically “Sorry boss but you lost fair & square. In addition to that Trump got lots of good, sound legal advice from competent lawyers (from the WH Counsel’s Office, Barr/DOJ except for Environmental Division idiot Jeffery Clarke and others)
- Unfortunately others chimed in. The crazies also got face time with Trump. John Eastman, the aforementioned Jeff Clark, Sydney Powell and others. And one Rudy G. It’s that latter group, including Rudy G. who was the “face” of so much of the election denialism that told Trump what he wanted to hear. That it was all corrupt, that Biden/Democrats cheated and RINOs wouldn’t stand up to them. All the nonsense you’ve come to know and loathe.
I don’t need to tell you which group Trump chose to listen to. What matters is that he listened to the wrong folks. More to the point is this:
Smith (and those trying the case) can say “You want INTENT? Trump chose to rely on a clearly drunk lawyer telling him what he wanted to hear!”
It’s that plain and simple. Forget all the legal brief type language. Trump had people, people HE had appointed and who until then he’d trusted because they’d done all manner of sleaze on his behalf telling him the truth. But he chose instead to listen to crackpots, including the best known one who was fronting so much of his Big Lie who was wasted!
Trump willfully ignored professionals and instead chose to rely on drunken Rudy G.
It’s that simple folks.
Put it to your friends like that. And if Lincoln Project happens to see this well hell, YOU guys should be able to turn this into a 30 second, or no more than a minute slam dunk on Trump putting it in terms even a wasted at the corner bar MAGA goober can get.
Even simpler: Jan 2nd call to Raffensburger was after the 60+ court cases AND 3, count ’em 3!!! recounts in Georgia. And don’t forget the lame brains in Arizona who found more for Biden.
Tired of the excuses.
Trump went with someone who told him what he wanted to hear. I’m shocked. Sheee-it the pure d fool has been doing that for the majority of his life. In fact one would be better off just asking the idiot “donald, what do YOU want?” rather than dealing with the facts of any matter.
All this is… is speculation by Rolling Stone & other media as to WHY Jack Smith is asking witnesses regarding Rudy Ghouliani’s state of inebriation. This has more to do IMO with Jack Smith solidifying charges against Ghouliani. It’s not like Ghouliani suddenly started drinking heavily when he started representing Trumpelthinskin. He’s been a drunk for decades. It’s also not like the alcohol caused a sudden lapse in Ghouliani’s otherwise (un)sound legal ethics. Both he & Don The Con have been intimate scamming partners for many years.
Ghouliani owes Don the Con and is probably as loyal as anyone in Trumpelthinskin’s ever shrinking inner circle. You may recall Drumpf got Rudy Ghouliani’s son Andrew Ghouliani a $95,000 do-nothing job in the White House as Sports Liaison. And Rudy Ghouliani’s failed 2008 Presidential campaign also paid over $53,000 to Benedict Donald to use one of his FL golf courses for campaign event space.
Ghouliani is about as intertwined financially as anyone associated with the Orange Cheetoh other than his immediate family members. Andrew Ghouliani has started a PAC to raise (scam?) $ for Rudy’s legal defense, given that both Rudy and Trumpelthinskin are over-leveraged, nearly broke, and scamming is their main source of cash flow to pay for defense lawyers at this point.
Whatever the reason for Jack Smith pursuing this line of questioning & fact-gathering, I have 100% trust Smith knows exactly what he’s doing and if we don’t ever find out why, that’s good with me. Main thing is that in 2024 when the Judge asks how the jury decided on each count, we’ll hear “Guilty” many times.