Rudy Giuliani

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
The Big Lie is the “Russia Collusion with Trump campaign”. It was all a hoax.
It was a nefarious hoax initiated by the Hillary Clinton campaign and repeated ad nauseum by Democrat politicians and the mainstream media. But no high profile lawsuits followed and Trump chose not to have his DOJ prosecute Hillary. Why was that - because they would've had to bring the cases before a biased DC court? Regardless, it's not hard to imagine what would've happened if the situation had been reversed.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and muttly

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
It was a nefarious hoax initiated by the Hillary Clinton campaign and repeated ad nauseum by Democrat politicians and the mainstream media. But no high profile lawsuits followed and Trump chose not to have his DOJ prosecute Hillary. Why was that - because they would've had to bring the cases before a biased DC court? Regardless, it's not hard to imagine what would've happened if the situation had been reversed.
Lawfare wouldn’t be as successful if the cases were not before highly partisan judges and juries. That’s their template.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
It's really sad that someone who was held in such high regard at one point has fallen so far.
Normally, it would be sad, but because he shows no remorse, remains uncooperative, and continues to repeat his lies, he receives no compassion from me. This man ruined the lives of the two defendants and visited great harm on our country. Anyone can be forgiven, but even God does not forgive those who do not repent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and Ragman

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Normally, it would be sad, but because he shows no remorse, remains uncooperative, and continues to repeat his lies, he receives no compassion from me. This man ruined the lives of the two defendants and visited great harm on our country. Anyone can be forgiven, but even God does not forgive those who do not repent.
Oh, trust me, I'm not forgiving him, or any of Trump's minions for what they have done to our country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
And if I'm wrong about the bond thing, and an appeal is made, what would the grounds be? The trial was a fair trial. Unless there is reversible error not now evident, there is no reason to believe an appeal will succeed. It is possible the amount of damages may be trimmed back some by a higher court, but Giuliani would still be liable for defamation and still owe many millions.

At the hands of a jury that made a major statement, the defendants received their justice, and Guiliani received his retribution. Judgments like these are called intentional torts. They are not dischargeable in bankruptcy. Freeman and Moss can chase Giuliani to his grave with claims on his money.

With their massive award, the jury condemned Giuliani to live the rest of his life as a broke joke.
The "Reasonable Man" principle is often applied in legal cases and verdicts, especially those involving torts. In this case it appears a reasonable person was nowhere to be found - especially in a DC court for Giuliani, a Trump associate and prominent Republican figure . This should come as no surprise considering how J6 defendants have been treated there.

Even if Giuliani was completely guilty as charged, no reasonable person would believe these two women deserve over $70 Million dollars apiece in compensatory and punitive damages. It's highly unlikely their lives were damaged as badly as their sob stories describe, and it's also doubtful their net worth before trial was anywhere near $1 million. Wonder who paid their lawyers' fees and retainers - or did they work on contingency?

That said, if Giuliani is guilty he should pay an appropriate penalty, and these women deserve fair compensation for what pain and suffering they might have had. However, they don't deserve to win the lottery.
Moral of the story: don't tell lies about elections and election workers.
The story has no morals because the principles don't apply equally to Democrats; check the lies they told about the 2016 election for reference. The lesson learned is don't be a Trump supporter or associate and get brought before a DC court.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and muttly

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
More insight on compensatory damages; it sounds like these ridiculous awards are likely to be reduced on appeal.

"The Supreme Court has tied the size of punitive to the compensatory damages. A ratio above 1:10 is often found constitutionally questionable under that analysis. Here, however, the compensatories are very high..."

 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and muttly

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Even if Giuliani was completely guilty as charged,
The evidence is clear as day. It's on video. Giuliani defamed and continues to defame Freeman and Moss.
no reasonable person would believe these two women deserve over $70 Million dollars apiece in compensatory and punitive damages. It's highly unlikely their lives were damaged as badly as their sob stories describe, and it's also doubtful their net worth before trial was anywhere near $1 million.
I had similar thoughts about the damages amount. I have the same thoughts when I read of traffic accident victims who were not rich become rich after a trucker is found at fault for their injuries. These people would have never earned in their entire life a fraction of the jury award. Yet juries find it easy to award vast sums.

The punitive damages against Giuliani make some sense. As the name implies, they are designed to punish him, and the jury clearly made that statement. When you consider the damage done to the country by Giuliani's lies (and the jury may have considered that), the high amount makes sense. When you recognize that punitive damages are designed to have a deterrent effect on other would-be liars, the high amount also makes sense.

The compensatory damages are another matter. If the women need to relocate, need to replace the income and benefits they lost because no one will employ them any more, and need bodyguards for the rest of their lives, it's not unreasonable to provide funds for that. But that expense does not come to tens of millions of dollars.

I heard some commentators talking about expert testimony regarding reputation. Apparently, they said it would take millions of dollars to recover the damaged reputations these woman suffered. If you consider nationwide ad campaigns, that number might be accurate, but these women were not major public figures before Rudy's lies about them. Had I been on that jury, I don't think I would so readily agree to a multi-million dollar award for damaged reputation.

Also, the jury knew Giuliani was claiming poverty. Maybe some jurors will talk to explain more what was on their mind. The plaintiffs themselves were asking for an amount far smaller than the jury awarded. It would be interesting to learn why the jury was so generous.
Wonder who paid their lawyers' fees and retainers - or did they work on contingency?
I don't know who it was, and, just as some of the Trump co-defendants are having their legal fees paid by others, would not be improper for Freeman and Moss to have their fees paid by others who were interested in seeing them well represented. Whoever paid them, they got their money's worth. Money aside, this is a massive win for the plaintiffs.

On the other hand, Giuliani helped set up this big win. His failure to cooperate with the court in discovery literally handed a gift to he plaintiffs. The judge warned Giuliani that negative inferences could be drawn if he did hot cooperate with the court in discovery. He continued to be difficult so the judge did exactly what she said she would do; draw negative inferences and find him liable for defamation.

Regarding "sob stories," I do not doubt these woman suffered the threats and fear and need to move from their homes they said they did. If their testimony in court was as heartfelt as their testimony to the House Jan 6 committee, it's easy to see how the jury was moved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ragman

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
The Jury's Intent

In his opening statement, Guiliani's attorney "... Sibley called Freeman and Moss 'good people' and acknowledged that they had been harmed. But by whom? he asked. 'What harm can we say he caused the plaintiffs?' Tens of millions in damages, he said, would be 'the civil equivalent of the death penalty' and, effectively, 'the end of Mr. Giuliani.'” (Source)

The jury heard those words and awarded the plaintiffs $100 million more than the plaintiffs asked for. From that award, it seems the jury fully intended to end Giuliani. Giuliani's attorney told them how to do it, and after hearing the testimony, the jury chose to do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and Ragman

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
There will be appeals.
I learned a little more about appeal bonds.

The idea behind an appeal bond is that while an appeal could be filed for good faith reasons, it can also be filed simply to delay the pay day. To avoid that, litigants are required to pay in advance an appeal bond which is usually something more than the amount of the judgment, so that it's there in case there is a finality in the case.

If Giuliani appeals, an appeal bond may or may not be required. This is a complex issue and court rulings would likely have to be made on the related questions. But if an appeal bond is required, it would be a challenge for Guiliani to post one. He claims to be broke. Several creditors are suing him for payments they say he owes. No one in their right mind would post such a bond on Giuliani's behalf. If a bond is required, Giuliani may not be able to appeal because he cannot meet the requirements.

While that may not seem just to many people, the jury found that Giuliani defamed the defendants to such a degree that a massively high judgement was awarded. It was the gross injustices Giuliani visited upon the defendants that got him into this mess in the first place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and Ragman

skyraider

Veteran Expediter
US Navy
How do these people sleep at night when you just got nailed for 100 million plus....I cant think that large,,,a 20 dollar bill in my pocket and Im a happy boy, well wait, a hundred would be better...lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
About the Plaintiffs/Witnesses

In the Giuliani defamation trial, Moss and Freeman were the plaintiffs. In the federal and Georgia election interference trials, they will be witnesses. We have now seen how a jury responds to these two. The jury was sympathetic to them and found them to be credible. Additionally, Moss and Freeman now have experience on the stand, under oath, and in front of the attorney from the other side, who grilled them as any such attorney would. They have gained confidence having been vindicated at trial, and they are now receiving wide praise as brave women and heroes of democracy.

So seasoned and supported, Moss and Freeman will be highly credible and formidable witnesses for Jack Smith and Fani Willis when they are called to the stand.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
If Giuliani appeals, an appeal bond may or may not be required. This is a complex issue and court rulings would likely have to be made on the related questions. But if an appeal bond is required, it would be a challenge for Guiliani to post one. He claims to be broke. Several creditors are suing him for payments they say he owes. No one in their right mind would post such a bond on Giuliani's behalf. If a bond is required, Giuliani may not be able to appeal because he cannot meet the requirements.
By this reasoning, Giuliani (or any other defendant in any other case) would be denied their rights to appeal an unfair civil award because they don't have enough money. Does our legal system really work that way - only those with means are allowed to appeal? Probably not - but then again, maybe it does in DC.

So just for the sake of argument, let's assume for a moment that the legal system does work like that and Rudy won't be able to appeal because he can't afford it. That would fit the Democrat template that's being used against Trump and his supporters, his associates and his attorneys; sue and prosecute them into financial oblivion. Use the power of the federal government to overwhelm them with IRS audits, legal proceedings and lawyer fees, or force them to plead to some felony or misdemeanor to just get the feds off their back. They did this to Gen. Flynn, the J6 protestors, Trump's lawyers, Trump himself and even the parents from a Loudoun county, VA school board meeting. Is it any wonder why Trump is sky-high in the polls right now, and climbing with every new verdict?
While that may not seem just to many people, the jury found that Giuliani defamed the defendants to such a degree that a massively high judgement was awarded. It was the gross injustices Giuliani visited upon the defendants that got him into this mess in the first place.
This jury was likely made up of peers of the plaintiffs - not the defendant, but regardless he was found guilty. The bottom line remains the same: this absurd punishment doesn't remotely fit the crime.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
About the Plaintiffs/Witnesses

In the Giuliani defamation trial, Moss and Freeman were the plaintiffs. In the federal and Georgia election interference trials, they will be witnesses. We have now seen how a jury responds to these two. The jury was sympathetic to them and found them to be credible. Additionally, Moss and Freeman now have experience on the stand, under oath, and in front of the attorney from the other side, who grilled them as any such attorney would. They have gained confidence having been vindicated at trial, and they are now receiving wide praise as brave women and heroes of democracy.
No doubt the Trump legal researchers are already vetting every aspect of the personal backgrounds of these "heroes of democracy." It will be interesting to see if they really are pure as the wind-driven snow, or just credible, sympathetic liars who were well coached by their prosecutorial handlers. Assuming the Federal and GA election trials ever happen, they'll be cross-examined by a different caliber of attorneys than those who represented Giuliani.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
No doubt the Trump legal researchers are already vetting every aspect of the personal backgrounds of these "heroes of democracy." It will be interesting to see if they really are pure as the wind-driven snow, or just credible, sympathetic liars who were well coached by their prosecutorial handlers. Assuming the Federal and GA election trials ever happen, they'll be cross-examined by a different caliber of attorneys than those who represented Giuliani.
Even if they are flawed characters, they were grossly and unjustly defamed by Giuliani. The crime here is not theirs and they are not suspects. The perpetrator is Giuliani, who is now living the nightmare life he earned. The defamation is clearly documented on video, as are the victims' innocent and good-faith acts as election workers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
By this reasoning, Giuliani (or any other defendant in any other case) would be denied their rights to appeal an unfair civil award because they don't have enough money.
That's one of the complications is this question that I meant. If Giuliani is denied the ability to appeal because he cannot afford to post the appeal bond, It smacks of fundamental unfairness. Some make the same argument about cash bail. All who are arrested are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. But only those who can afford or make bail are allowed to go free pending trial.
Does our legal system really work that way - only those with means are allowed to appeal? Probably not - but then again, maybe it does in DC.
It's widely said that rich white people do better in court than people of color and people of ordinary means. Because they have money, they can hire smart lawyers and use expensive legal maneuvers that are unavailable to the rest of us.
So just for the sake of argument, let's assume for a moment that the legal system does work like that and Rudy won't be able to appeal because he can't afford it. That would fit the Democrat template that's being used against Trump and his supporters, his associates and his attorneys; sue and prosecute them into financial oblivion. Use the power of the federal government to overwhelm them with IRS audits, legal proceedings and lawyer fees, or force them to plead to some felony or misdemeanor to just get the feds off their back. They did this to Gen. Flynn, the J6 protestors, Trump's lawyers, Trump himself and even the parents from a Loudoun county, VA school board meeting. Is it any wonder why Trump is sky-high in the polls right now, and climbing with every new verdict?
Your point holds some water, but it is also important to recognize that actual crimes were committed. Had the crimes not been committed, the defendants would not be in the legal places they now find themselves.
This jury was likely made up of peers of the plaintiffs - not the defendant, but regardless he was found guilty. The bottom line remains the same: this absurd punishment doesn't remotely fit the crime.
I do not disagree with your criticism about the size of the financial penalty. It was a full $100 million higher than the plaintiffs sought. This is a jury verdict and they clearly wanted to make a strong statement. In that sense, they may have had more in mind than the crime itself. They may have been also thinking about the deterrent the high award will have on other would-be defamers.

The size of the judgement may be what enables Giuliani to actually appeal. The court may recognize the insurmountable barrier it creates regarding a standard appeal bond, and for that reason, allow Giuliani to appeal.

If that happens, an appeal bond seems reasonable. The question then becomes, what is the appropriate amount? Appeal bonds exist to protect the victims from bad-faith delay tactics by the perpetrators. And Giuliani has steadfastly refused to disclose his true financial condition to the court. Give that, what would be a fair number for this appeal bond?

Whatever the appeal status and appeal bond may be, Giuliani will be wise to start paying something ASAP. He risks a contempt finding and jail if he does not.

Today, the court will sign off on the final judgement. That empowers the plaintiffs to attach Giuliani's known assets and garnish his income, and any future assets an income that are revealed. The collections process begins today and will continue for the rest of Giuliani's life and beyond.
 
Last edited:

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Whatever the appeal status and appeal bond may be, Giuliani will be wise to start paying something ASAP. He risks a contempt finding and jail if he does not.

Today, the court will sign off on the final judgement. That empowers the plaintiffs to attach Giuliani's known assets and garnish his income, and any future assets an income that are revealed. The collections process begins today and will continue for the rest of Giuliani's life and beyond.
There might be a problem with the heroines of democracy getting paid - the IRS. Giuliani owes them $550K. The Feds are always first in line and also have a lien on his Palm Beach penthouse, so that asset will be tied up until all taxes are paid. Then there's all of his other creditors that have considerable owed to them, so they'll be fighting for the scraps of his money and assets as well. The ladies from GA will likely never see a dime from Giuliani.

Here's another interesting fact: if they ever do collect anything they'll have to pay taxes on it as ordinary income, including the fees their attorneys take. On the other hand, Rudy will be able to deduct the entire amount he pays to them from his taxes. How's that for everyone paying their "fair share"?

 
  • Haha
Reactions: RLENT

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
There might be a problem with the heroines of democracy getting paid -
They have already been paid in a settlement with their successful lawsuit with OAN. The settlement terms are private.
the IRS. Giuliani owes them $550K. The Feds are always first in line and also have a lien on his Palm Beach penthouse, so that asset will be tied up until all taxes are paid.
That is easy. When the judgement is attached, steps can be taken for the property to be seized from Giuliani and sold. The IRS portion will come off the top and the remainder or most of the remainder will go to the plaintiffs and toward their legal costs in liquidating this asset. This is not an instant solution but the IRS lien is not a barrier to the asset being seized and liquidated.
Then there's all of his other creditors that have considerable owed to them, so they'll be fighting for the scraps of his money and assets as well. The ladies from GA will likely never see a dime from Giuliani.
You are correct about the other creditors, but many of them are in court. The ladies from GA have a judgement they can attach to Giuliani's assets now. I don't know much about bankruptcy laws and creditor situations like this, but I tend to think that the creditors who have judgements are in line ahead of those who do not. Judgements are immediately enforceable.

I think they will see a dime from Giuliani, and maybe a bit more. With their judgement in hand, they can garnish his earnings and he is said to be earning $400,000 from his radio show. I have no details but I heard he recently signed a new contract with a media outlet. If so, that too can be garnished.

Will they collect $148 million, or even $1 million, from Giuliani? I don't know, but for me, that's not the point. These ladies were vindicated and Giuliani is receiving his retribution. That is as it should be. They knew Giuliani may have been broke when they started their lawsuit, but they persisted. Had this been only about the money for them, they may not have sued.

Finally, we do not know for sure Giuliani is broke. People are saying he is, but to date, he has yet to fully disclose his finances in any credible way, even when ordered by a court to do so.

On TV this weekend, the ladies' attorney was asked directly in an interview if they will next sue Trump for defamatory acts he committed. I had the very same question. The attorney gave an evasive non-answer. They may not get much from Giuliani, but they are in a position where they could potentially get a fair amount from Trump. There is no public movement in that direction yet, but it is a possibility.
Here's another interesting fact: if they ever do collect anything they'll have to pay taxes on it as ordinary income, including the fees their attorneys take.
That's correct, but they'd still be money ahead. And unlike tax deadbeat Giuliani, they would be good citizens and pay their taxes.
On the other hand, Rudy will be able to deduct the entire amount he pays to them from his taxes. How's that for everyone paying their "fair share"?
I don't know what the applicable tax laws have to do with "fair share" in this case. If Giuliani can pay and if he claims a tax deduction for doing so, it means first and foremost the ladies got paid. And if he claims a big deduction to offset other income, he must state that income on his tax return, thereby disclosing it to the ladies, who will no doubt receive a copy of it by court order.

Behind your comments, there seems to be an eagerness to see the ladies profit little from the massive jury award. I'm sure there are a lot of people who feel the same way. Again, for me, the big deal not the money. It is the jury's total vindication of these ladies, and the jury's decision to severely punish Giuliani for the severe harm he did.

The ladies may get little money from this judgement, but Giuliani will pay a very high price. The jury made sure of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and Ragman

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
They have already been paid in a settlement with their successful lawsuit with OAN. The settlement terms are private.
I thought this thread was about Giuliani.
That is easy. When the judgement is attached, steps can be taken for the property to be seized from Giuliani and sold. The IRS portion will come off the top and the remainder or most of the remainder will go to the plaintiffs and toward their legal costs in liquidating this asset. This is not an instant solution but the IRS lien is not a barrier to the asset being seized and liquidated.
The IRS holds the lien. They will liquidate the asset if they deem it necessary to collect the taxes owed.
Had this been only about the money for them, they may not have sued.
For those who believe that, I have a good deal on some beachfront property in West TN. Most normal people want no part of lawsuits, especially high profile ones. The publicity is in direct conflict with their alleged fear for their safety. If what they say is true, this verdict would bring out the nut cases even more. It appears they like the attention, and the really like the money.
Behind your comments, there seems to be an eagerness to see the ladies profit little from the massive jury award. I'm sure there are a lot of people who feel the same way.
My issue is the size of the judgement; it's outrageous and totally out of proportion with the tort for which Giuliani was found guilty. If justice prevails, the amount will be reduced by an appeals court to a realistic level.
 

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
I thought this thread was about Giuliani.
You know threads in this fourm drift broadly within a topic. Giuliani, his defamation, his victims. His payout or lack of it. All fair game.
The IRS holds the lien. They will liquidate the asset if they deem it necessary to collect the taxes owed.
Maybe or maybe not. Laws about this are complex. I did some searching on the related questions and quickly lost interest because this is the kind of legal soup trained lawyers deal with. I'm not going to get deep into it here because I would not know what I was talking about. In general, The women who received the jury verdict in favor of them and against Giuliani are in a very strong position to claim and take collections actions against the major portion of Giuliani's assets and income.
My issue is the size of the judgement; it's outrageous and totally out of proportion with the tort for which Giuliani was found guilty. If justice prevails, the amount will be reduced by an appeals court to a realistic level.
That could very well happen. It is not uncommon in medical malpractice, product liability and other such cases for a jury to award a massive sum and for that to be reduced on appeal.

But even if this happens in Giuliani's case, he is a broken (and maybe broke) man now, and he will be after any appeal. That situation is 100% of his own making and it was amplified when he hitched his wagon to the Trump star.

It is interesting to note that NO ONE testified in Giuliani's defense, not eve Giuliani himself. That's because he had no defense. What he did was wrong, wrong, wrong; and there was no way to prove otherwise in court. No evidence and no testimony in Giuliani's favor. Additionally, because Giuliani made things worse for himself by not cooperating in discovery, the jury had instructions to not accept as true any claims that Giuliani was broke.

Giuliani could have cooperated in discovery. He did not.
Giuliani could have testified in his defense. He did not.
Giuliani could have chosen to not defame the plaintiffs. He did not.

While I agree with you that the $148 million judgement is astronomically high, and that the plaintiffs are unlikely to collect even a tiny fraction of it, I am very pleased with the outcome of this trial, and I'm pleased to see the jury give Giuliani his well-deserved and life-long retribution.

On to Georgia, where the possibility is very real that Giuliani will be convicted of criminal charges and jailed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT
Top