Andrew Giuliani MAD AT JUDGES BEING MEAN TO DAD AND NOT LETTING HIM LAWYER!

Legal

BIG MAD

Liddle Andrew Giuliani released a video yesterday where he appears to be standing almost underneath the camera (maybe it is a very tall camera) and RAGING at the MEAN JUDGES who WON'T LET DAD DO LAWYER STUFF ANYMORE. It is ... oh, man, it's a fun video.

He even read their names out loud! Which ... don't know what his intentions were with that! The charitable interpretation is that he wanted to sound tough.

But yes, alas, we are sorry to all the people out there who were hoping one day to try to steal an American election for their very own, and praying they could have the badass awesome-sauce services of Rudy Giuliani. That possibility just got a little dimmer, as for the moment Giuliani is suspended from practicing law in the state of New York. Yes, the same Rudy Giuliani who used to run the Southern District of New York, and is now under criminal investigation by the Southern District of New York. (For reasons completely unrelated to his suspension!)

Apparently mean judges don't have the appreciation they should have for lawyers who throw press conferences at garden centers and make up lies about stolen elections. Regardless, may their decision set off a spate of new decisions about Rudy Giuliani's right to practice law!

Will Rudy's New York law license get unsuspended? The Magic 8 Ball, we mean the judges who wrote the opinion, don't sound so optimistic.


The appellate court explained, in 33 pages, that it has "uncontroverted evidence that respondent communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump's failed effort at reelection in 2020."

It continues:

These false statements were made to improperly bolster respondent's narrative that due to widespread voter fraud, victory in the 2020 United States presidential election was stolen from his client. We conclude that respondent's conduct immediately threatens the public interest and warrants interim suspension from the practice of law, pending further proceedings before the Attorney Grievance Committee.

"Immediately threatens the public interest." You know, because his campaign to overturn the election is ongoing.

More from the New York Times:

Mr. Giuliani now faces disciplinary proceedings and can fight the suspension. But the court said in its decision that Mr. Giuliani's actions had posed "an immediate threat" to the public and that it was likely he would face "permanent sanctions" after the proceedings conclude.

Their mouths to God's ears!

CNN legal analyst Elie Honig says this kind of decision is extremely rare, explaining, "This does not happen every day by any stretch. This is a very rare thing and a very extreme thing for the court to do."

In the ruling, the judges debunked Giuliani's lies and made-up bullshit. There wasn't even a hearing beforehand, they were just like oh hey, here are a bunch of Rudy's lies, all of which are reasons we are suspending his law license. And no, Mr. Giuliani, you cannot turn in your "evidence" at a later date. And no, "confidential informants" do not count as "evidence."

No really, that's a thing he had argued:

In opposition to this motion, respondent refers to affidavits he has not provided. He also relies on a "confidential informant". We do not understand, nor does respondent explain why, as a private attorney seemingly unconnected to law enforcement he would have access to a "confidential informant" that we cannot also have access to. At yet another point respondent claims he relies on a Trump attorney who chooses not to be identified. Respondent also refers to hundreds of witnesses, experts, and investigative reports, none of which have been provided or identified and an Excel spreadsheet, also not provided, purportedly listing the names of thousands of deceased voters who allegedly cast ballots in Michigan. [Citations omitted.]

The court calmly explains that lawyers are allowed to do lots of things, but they can't just lie, inside or outside the courtroom. And if there's dispute over whether he lied or not, he actually has to provide evidence of why he doesn't think he told a lie:

[R]espondent must demonstrate that there is some legitimate dispute about whether the statement is false or whether the statement was made by him without knowledge it was false. Conclusory or vague arguments will not create a controverted issue as to whether there has been misconduct. [...] [R]espondent's references to affidavits he has not provided, or sources of information he has not disclosed or other nebulous unspecified information, will not prevent the Court from concluding that misconduct has occurred.

That's legal speak for YA BURNT.

And then the ruling goes line by line through bullshits that have come out of Rudy's mouth about stolen elections and such.

Like when he repeatedly claimed Pennsylvania received hundreds of thousands more absentee ballots than it sent out. (Rudy tried to blame that one on somebody on his "team," who very accidentally filled his head with that bullshit.) "There is simply no proof to support this explanation," the ruling explains.

Also, when he made up all kinds of asinine numbers of "dead" people who had voted in Pennsylvania. And Georgia. And Arizona. "At various times, respondent claimed that 65,000 or 66,000 or 165,000 underage voters illegally voted in the Georgia 2020 election," the ruling says. Also 800 dead people. Or 6,000 dead people. Or 10,515 dead people. And 10,000 illegal immigrants voted in Arizona. Or was it 50,000? "The reality is probably 250,000," said Rudy one time. Or maybe it was 32,000.

Oh yeah, and there is this weird thing where Rudy apparently always says boxer Joe Frazier voted in the 2020 election in Pennsylvania, even though he has been deceased for 10 years? Fuck it, not even getting into it.

Point is, the court wrote down a lot of receipts. And that is why Rudy Giuliani's law license is currently suspended in New York. And that is why Andrew Giuliani is SO MAD GRRR.

In related news, yesterday was the 35th anniversary of the day Roy Cohn was disbarred.

[ruling / New York Times]

Follow Evan Hurst on Twitter.

Wonkette is funded ENTIRELY by a few thousand people like you. If you're not already, would you pls consider being the few thousandth and one?

How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)


Do your Amazon shopping through this link, because reasons.

Evan Hurst

Evan Hurst is the managing editor of Wonkette, which means he is the boss of you, unless you are Rebecca, who is boss of him. His dog Lula is judging you right now.

Follow him on Twitter RIGHT HERE.

Donate

How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)

Newsletter

©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc