Rudy Giuliani’s legal defense fund raised $ 9,590 (only $ 4,990,410 to go!)

When we last checked in with Rudy Giuliani, things didn’t look so hot for Donald trumpthe former personal lawyer of. Besides going from “America’s mayor” to “what happened to this guy?” – which is a big aside! – Giuliani faced a whole host of very serious legal issues, including, but not limited to: in connection with a criminal investigation into his relations with Ukraine; a ministry of justice probe his work involving Turkey; a defamation trial Dominion Voting Systems for its lies about the 2020 election; and the temporary suspension of his license to practice law. And it turns out things haven’t gotten much better for the former New York mayor, unless he’s forced to fund his legal defense – and only improving 0.1918% of his goal – could somehow be interpreted as “better”.

Yes, weeks after his mate Bernie kerik request people to spare all they could for Giuliani’s legal bills, the “Rudy Giuliani Legal Defense Fund” has raised just $ 9,590, less than 0.2% of the $ 5 million goal. (It is not clear if the RGLDF is a separate entity, the “Rudy Giuilani Freedom Fund” that Kerik helped create.) Kerik, the former New York Police Commissioner, knows a little about legal issues, having pleaded guilty in 2010 to tax fraud and other charges, before being forgiven, of course, by Donald Trump. You may also remember Kerik from other hits like apparently drive a case in an apartment near Ground Zero that had been reserved for 9/11 rescuers. On the fundraising page, the organizers encourage any type of person who identifies as a Giuliani groupie to fork out as much money as possible to defend the former lawyer of the former president, explaining “The swamp is revolting by placing a bull’s-eye on the back of every Trump loyalist. This puts Rudy at the top of their list. Rudy’s fate will determine if America is still a Republic ruled by We The People! Unfortunately for Rudy, this pitch apparently fell on deaf ears.

What does Trump think of Giuliani’s precarious financial situation? According to a new author reveal Michel Wolff, very little! Speak Independent:

A new book says Donald Trump “kicked out” and “cut off” his former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, for daring to ask the former president to pay him. “Trump is annoyed that he tried to get paid for his campaign defiance work,” writes Michael Wolff in the book, Landslide: The Last Days of the Trump Presidency, according to an extract published in Time. After Mr. Trump lost the 2020 presidential election, Mr. Giuliani tried to overturn the results of dozens of unsuccessful lawsuits. But according to Landslide, all the former mayor received for his efforts is the “cold shoulder” of Mr. Trump and his family.

In the last week of his presidency, isolated and twice indicted, Mr. Trump ordered assistants not to pay Mr. Giuliani’s fees. According to The Washington Post, the outgoing president was furious with his allies for not doing enough to keep him in the White House, even against Mr Giuliani, who had done more than most.

To be fair, Giuliani probably should have seen this coming, given that Trump is known to have stiffened his contractors, to dishwasher to painters to architects, and when faced with it saying things like, “Maybe he didn’t do a good job and I was dissatisfied with his job.” “

If you would like to receive the Levin report daily in your inbox, click here register.

Alabama representative offers familiar legal argument as to why he cannot be prosecuted for helping incite the January 6 riot

Like Donald Trump, congressman Mo Brooks thinks he should shirk responsibility on his part in fostering the insurgency because he is a government employee and somehow everything is fine. Through The Washington Post:

Brooks (R-Ala.) Has asked to be returned from a federal lawsuit alleging he instigated mobs to storm the United States Capitol on January 6, claiming he could not be held responsible because ‘he was acting as a federal employee while contesting the 2020 election sparked a heated speech just before the riot began. Brooks said in a motion on Friday that he should be dropped as a defendant or represented by the Department of Justice in the case, filed March 5 by Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-California). The lawsuit names former President Donald Trump, Brooks, Donald Trump Jr., and Rudolph W. Giuliani and seeks damages in connection with their statements from a crowd near the White House that the former president said to march to the Capitol.

“Today is the day that American patriots start removing names,” Brooks said, echoing Trump’s baseless claims that the election was rigged. Brooks told people in the crowd that they had been the victims of a historic robbery and asked them if they were prepared to sacrifice their lives for their country.… In his filing on Friday, Brooks cited a 1988 law that protects federal employees from personal liability while acting within the scope of their duty or employment. He argued that his speech, tweets and demeanor “were unmistakably delivered in the context of and in preparation” for a joint session of Congress on January 6 to confirm the results of the presidential election. Trump asked the judge to dismiss the case on similar grounds, saying that as president he had absolute immunity from prosecution for his official actions and was free to urge Congress to take action in his favor during his electoral count.

About Charles D. Goolsby

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *