Lol, Rudy Tudy Is Moldy Fruity
Rudy had his lawyer promise to the jury that Rudy would testify and explain the truth.
Nope, he not only failed to personally testify, he put on no defense at all.
Mothers, don’t let your babies to ever grow up to be this stupid.
$148 million. Wow.
You all should get ready to learn about:
1) additur and remittitur.
2) Supersedeas bonds.
This was absolutely a damning verdict, and there is no way for Rudy to hide from it. Nor Trump, who will blithely act like he never knew Rudy.
Fun times, but there is a LOT ahead. Stay tuned.
A reminder to all new and existing community members participating in comments:
— We have been moving to a new minimum standard to support community security over the last year. Usernames should be unique and a minimum of a minimum of 8 letters.
— We do not require a valid, working email, but you must use the same email address each time you publish a comment here. **Single use disposable email addresses do not meet this standard.**
— If you have been commenting here but have less than 1000 comments published and been participating less than 10 years as of last October 2022, you must update your username to match the new standard.
Thank you.
If I were among those who spread and repeated Rudy’s defamatory lies, how much should I be worried?
(Asking for a friend.)
No need to worry, because your friend is “VERY VERY rich!”
[Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username and email address each time you comment so that community members get to know you. This is your FIFTH username; you have also commented as JMNY, Icantremember, JMNY_Clikit, jmny_clikit, under the last of which you have posted the most comments since changing your name to comply with the site’s standard. I don’t care how you manage it but stick to the same name and email every time you comment. /~Rayne]
You don’t think that the court would order a retrial under additur and remittitur, do you ? Surely they would just order a lowering of the judgement?
Rudy’s apartment isn’t even near the ballpark for a supersedeas bond, is it ?
No, that is not a retrial issue. In fairness, I have only been through this in state courts, however that equivalent motion would be made in the trial court before appeal.
Rudy’s failure to present a defense isn’t likely to help him persuade the court on either of these bases.
The cost of a bond is typically 10% of the amount due. The list price of Rudy’s condo is only about $6.1 million, so he’s in trouble, especially as this is not his only unpaid debt. I would be surprised, too, if a bond issuer were to be satisfied with a lien on that property. It’s likely to demand cash from a guy with as many liabilities as Rudy has.
Defamation is an intentional harm, which makes it unlikely, but not certain, that an award would be held to be nondischargeable in bankruptcy. But that’s not automatic. As the plaintiffs’ lawyers will know, they will have to actively contest the dischargeability of this award in any bankruptcy proceeding Rudy might file, and establish that the harm was both willful and malicious.
Not a complete given, but a real problem for Giuliani. Yes, can Rudy even afford the bond vig? I doubt it.
Additional Rudy woes; The IRS has placed a tax lien on a Palm Beach property for $550K for unpaid 2021 taxes.
That Rudy is so blatantly and publicly unrepentant – he still insists that what he said about plaintiffs was true – would only burnish the willful and malicious character of his falsehoods. That conduct is unlikely to help his prospects at any stage of the appeals process, or, in fact, in pressing his case before a bankruptcy court judge.
Yes…and misrepresenting what happened, and attacking the Judge!
Transcript of the VIDEO at this link:
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1735777462535999534
4:42 PM · Dec 15, 2023
“establish that the harm was both willful and malicious”
So… basically play the clip of Rudy re-defaming the plaintiffs outside the courthouse to the press?
Correction: It would be “likely” but not certain that a defamation award would be deemed nondischargeable, but that would have to be independently proven in a bankruptcy proceeding.
Rudy’s failure to provide a defense, his publicly repeating his defamation, and his blatant unrepentant stance, in the face of contrary evidence produced by plaintiffs, go a long way to establish “willful and malicious.”
I don’t do personal bankruptcy, but Section 522(p) of the Code might put Rudy’s Florida homestead exemption in danger, if he chooses to file in bankruptcy. Outside of bankruptcy, his homestead exemption is about the only asset his creditors can’t reach, although I guess he gets to keep most of his pensions.
additur and remittitur? Asterix and Obelix, or rather their insurance agent Assurancetourix, would like a word.
(a play on “assurance tous risques” = comprehensive insurance)
Cover provided by Triple Ah, I suppose.
What, you mean “my client is a senile old fool, please be merciful” isn’t a defense? (/s)
You forgot the word “drunk” when describing Rudy.
Having worked with quite a few people with cognitive and memory problems, I was actually struck by how cogent and articulate his statements to the press yesterday afternoon were. (Sometimes people do seem more with it than they are by being on a kind of “auto-pilot” repeating stored up sentences they’ve used a lot in the past). But really, Rudy is a lot of bad things, including an irresponsible drunk, but senile he is not. He is fully responsible for crafting his lies and it’s an insult to people with actual disabilities and actual debilitating consequences of old age for his lawyer to claim that. (If he were in my church he would be well below the 50th percentile in age, and they are responsible and honest human beings) His sole disabilities are from being self indulgent and having no regard for decent human beings.
The comment was meant as a snarky exaggeration of some of Sibley’s closing arguments, which included:
“This is a man who did great things. If he hasn’t been so great lately, I want you to judge him by the entire character of who he is.”
“That’s one of the reasons he’s having such a hard time accepting the things about this case,” Sibley explained. “My client, he’s almost 80 years old.” (This from a Politico article.)
From ABC:
“Joseph Sibley, a lawyer for Mr Giuliani, acknowledged that his client had caused harm, but said the penalty the plaintiffs sought would be “catastrophic” for his client. He told the jury Mr Giuliani was a “good man”, referencing his role as mayor of New York following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.”
I saw all that BS from the lawyer on the live tweets of the trial and that’s why it struck me that Giuliani manifested no signs of senility when he spoke in front of the cameras after the trial. I wasn’t offended by your snark, I was offended by Mr. Sibley’s disregard for the dignity of people who are old by making that mendacious play.
For Make Benefit of Glorious Nation of DumbFuckistan…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tFUaKXdH-0
Surely, his billionaire friend will gladly post bond for his appeal!
With what collateral? The Trump Organization which will be under control of New York State because of Trump’s business fraud?
Interesting that the criticism of Judge Engoron’s order concerning dissolving Trump’s companies is only now getting press. Unsurprisingly, the notion that Engoron is “unconventional” and perhaps acting beyond statutory authority is coming from the NYT, quoting David W. Lowden. Not much of a groundswell there. The only thing missing is a Maggie Haberman byline.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/14/nyregion/trump-fraud-trial-judge.html
Engeron has a reputation as a pretty fair and good jurist.
The NYTimes things it’s more important to focus on his unconventional past – I think he drove a taxi and his jokes than his seemingly solid rulings. Given the defendant and the defendant’s lawyers antics and disrespect in and out of the courtroom, he has displayed a judicious temperament as well.
The NYT is all-in on propping up Defendant-1, and the wipeout of TrumpOrg will emasculate Defendant-1 and render the NYT’s preferred candidate dead in the water. Anything from the NYT, WashPo or the WSJ needs to be taken with a boulder of salt for that reason.
There is really no other viable GOP candidate that doesn’t have baggage, and a GOP analogue to Obama doesn’t exist either.
I suspect none of the movers and shakers in Manhattan would be pleased at the precedent. It seems quite possible the NYT is responding to their needs as much as Trump’s.
I really think that Trump cares not a whit whether Rudy spends the rest of his life in a homeless shelter. I doubt that he even fears that Rudy will turn states evidence, since Rudy’s not likely to stay out of prison given the charges in Georgia–and the fact that Giuliani is not anybody’s idea of a credible witness any more.
Marcy:
https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1735777109694464201
4:41 PM · Dec 15, 2023
Links to Scott McFarlane:
https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1735776513750921431
4:39 PM · Dec 15, 2023
Transcript of ^^^:
Added: OMFG!!!
Marcy is being kind.
One would think that Trump’s second bite at defamation vs E Jean Carroll would have taught Rudy something.
Of course, one would be wrong.
More VIDEO, via Jenny, below:
https://twitter.com/lawindsor/status/1735796136839975251
5:57 PM · Dec 15, 2023
So Rudy is going to say the verdict should be tossed out because he was not allowed to present evidence? Wasn’t the reason he was not allowed to present evidence on liability because he didn’t respond to discovery? Good luck with that argument, chump.
That, and he did not even try to present any evidence. This is not a discovery question.
Maybe Rudy will save the courts a lot of hassle and hire Alina Habba as his sole appellate counsel. That would shorten the process and make the success of Rudy’s appeals more predictable.
Assuming Rudy finds a lawyer to take his appeal, Judge Howell’s decision to put him in default for discovery abuse will presumably be reviewed by the “abuse of discretion,” standard. A heavy lift. The causation argument, that he was not responsible for other people making threats, would seem to have been a fact matter resolved by the jury, almost impossible to overturn on appeal. As Bmaz predicts, maybe any appeal will focus on trying to reduce the numbers.
To reduce the numbers, he would have to quit accusing the GA election workers of fraud. YMMV, but I don’t find that likely.
the web says YMMV means your mileage may vary. Is that what you mean here, in the figurative sense of I could be wrong about this?
YMMV is a common usage for events may turn out differently than expected in a particular case. In this post, almost all the uses are connected to a forecast of what a court will do based on what is known now about the facts and the law. While attorneys can sometimes be fairly certain about what a court will do, getting the forecast error rate down to zero is difficult.
Yes
He has to say that shit. It’s his only chance, though a negligible one, of getting any monetary help from Trump. (“See Boss, I’m still in there pitching!”)
Likely Trump isn’t returning Rudy’s calls? Perhaps Rudy should consider a very long vacation in Andorra, Cuba, Russia, Brunei?
Hah! Like Trump would give him a dime.
I can’t decide if I should offer Rudy a tissue or a mint.
A Ginger mint.
Judge mints.
What, no encourage mint?
He’ll be lucky to get employ mint.
Monu-mints
As long as it is to to Rudy’s detri-mint.
A monu-mint to Rudy in a tu-tu?
Woof woof woof….
Best one ever.
A couple more judgments like this and he is going to need the U.S. Mint.
It was mint to be.
Who can forget this short lived gem:
https: //theweek.com/speedreads/869572/library-congress-cafeteria-serving-punny-impeachmentthemed-dessert
Maybe Donald can ask Waltine to
find Rudy a place in the kitchen to take care of the con-di’mints, especially the ketchup.
Perhaps a lump of coal.
No mint, but I’ve got a USB that you can stick somewhere.
And, as far as I know, BadUSB is still out there – beware!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BadUSB
Just a friendly public health warning/reminder: only a USB that’s
USP would be safe for internal use in any human port.
Fake news. Rudy can and should self-impale if he so wants.
Those are people who dyed, dyed
Those are people who dyed, dyed
That is fantastic!
Played pick-up basketball with Jim Carroll. Saw him live a million times. Still in heavy rotation around here along with another favorite local act, the Dolls.
Jim Carroll was great.
I gotsa Basketball Diaries Jones.
And David Jo is a force of nature, all funky but chic and shite, multiple personality crises notwithstanding.
Jim Carroll!
OMG, punaise, I woke up this morning with that song in my head. I hadn’t read this post or your comment (I swear on every sacred holy book including Black’s Law Dictionary and Sibley’s Guide to Birds of the Northeastern US) so it’s got to be…Synchronicity?
Jim Carroll lives in both our memories. Never expected that.
how cool dat?
Rudy is into goobermints.
I may have judged Rudy unfairly. He says it’s not about the money, his father and Jesus Christ would be proud of him, and he’s willing to go to jail for telling the truth.
Time for a group hug.
Knock yourself out.
I envision the breath of Gabby Johnson from Blazing Saddles.
Exactly. And thank you Brother Johnson!
I suppose I feel as pleased about this as anybody else here, but there’s only one misdemeanant who counts, and it isn’t a drunken ex-lawyer with — apparently — some pretty severe mental issues.
They all count.
I think @nycsouthpaw makes a good point, here:
https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1735793559951880309
5:46 PM · Dec 15, 2023
Interesting. But why continue with this line after the party is over?
It looks more like a deeply imbedded trait to me.
This.
We’re talking about the guy who announced a press conference at the “Four Seasons” and thought no one would notice that it happened not at a fancy hotel but at a landscaping business next to a sex shop.
And across the street from Delaware Valley Cremation Center
If he admits he was wrong or mistaken his grifting ends basically. If they were paying him to say he’d all made it up, he’d be on that like…well…I’m’ sure you can imagine it.
The grift is going to have to be veerrry lucrative to show a net gain.
Just guessing here, but the discovery default suggests to me that Rudy may have engaged in some spurious “asset protection” maneuvers pre-trial, perhaps offshore. He’ll no doubt claim these transfers were made in “good faith”, and that he wholeheartedly believed this nonsense. Not the best defense, but it may be all he has. And, this behavior may prove useful in some international jurisdictions.
For those with experience in this area, does anyone foresee a claim against the former president under traditional principal/agency principles? That is, Rudy was simply acting as an agent wholly within the scope of this authority and the liabilities he incurred may be imputed to Trump.
CNN interviewed a journalist who has been covering Rudy for decades. His take: the Rudy of today is the same Rudy of years ago. Never wrong, never change his mind, never apologize. The only difference is that back in the day he was using these traits against the mob so he got a pass.
“Rudy got a pass”
not with me, after Bldg 7
My wild-assed guess goes along the lines of: “Tovarisch, you’re on your own. Whatever you do, don’t expose our shenanigans or the Novochok boys will visit.”
I have absolutely no idea why he’d continue to blather once he defaulted on discovery. IIRC, Trump had already abandoned him; he & his legal team had to know that anything he said from that point on could only hurt him.
He’s making a good run at non compos mentis.
Plus in vino non veritas.
What do you expect from Rudy Port?
Could be that veiled allusion to the existential threat…could also be a form of roll up.
If they burn it all down figuratively speaking, creating a massive dust cloud of confusion in the process, what’s left for the feds and states to chase?
I’m sure that everyone that has ever had to deal with trump and his “friends” will be looking forever in their rear-view mirror, or wondering if their car is safe to turn on, or even their doorknob is clean. That is the purpose of this terror campaign.
Unfortunately, it seems most of the (r)epuglicon congress things have been explicitly told of their personal risks.
That’s what I think as well. Fear of Trump, that he might have something on them, that he made a vague suggestion that “we wouldn’t want anything embarrassing to come out,” even if there is no there there, is probably enough to keep people quiet and on the Trump train.
Rudy is playing for Trump, just like Stefanick, Vance, Gaetz, Greene, Boebert, all of them. To say nothing of certain media people.
I have no proof. Only intuition and my observation of how Trump operates.
Didn’t Alex Jones do the same thing with the Sandy Hook defamation trial.
It is almost as if the tactic of not participating in the lawsuit and getting a big judgment against you is a strategy. I can’t help but think back to the litigation about the election claims – bad legal arguments, no evidence – but done to rile up the masses and to provide a pretext for the fake elector scheme and the events of Jan. 6th.
And to help sell merch.
During his NY mayoralty, one columnist noted “even his friends don’t like him.”
“Rudy Tuty”? Et tu, bmaz?
/s
Snark aside, I’m happy the Court held Giuliani accountable, but as others have expressed, despite the damage the plaintiffs suffered, the likelihood they’ll be paid is low.
Hopefully Trump can raise lots and lots of money in rallies to raise money for Rudy.
Then…of course…keep it all for himself.
Rudy who?
I’m in awe of Marcy Wheeler and the contributors to this invaluable news resource. I don’t post because I’m just not up to the calibre of the debate but I follow very closely. I’ve been waiting a long time to say that I wonder if this will be the week that, in the future, people will say was when the forces threatening us all actually first began to crack?
The Court, I think, got it right on the earlier default judgment as to liability, but $74 million each in damages? Right. The $24 million each that the plaintiffs sought seems a bit more tenable.
Anyone willing to guess as to where the number might end up, down the line, if it goes through a full appellate review?
When appellate courts review jury valuations of intangible injuries (the defamation and emotional distress claims of Moss/Freeman) there are few hard principles. Much deference is usually given to a jury, and the record presumably contains much by way of consequence, but if an appellate panel wants to muck around, they can find a way to do it. A panel in the Fourth Circuit years ago discounted an intangible verdict award based on how few transcript pages from the trial comprised the testimony about the intangible damages. Trial counsel probably built a strong record on the fallout from Rudy’s false claims about them, so it will be interesting.
The plaintiffs had an expert witness testify on the amount it would take to repair their reputation, etc. The expert witness presented evidence like the number of Google hits, etc.. The expert witness came up with the figure of $47 million. It looks like the jury reduced the reputational harm damage but added them back in to the emotional damages. And then the jury sent a message with the punitive damages.
Not only that, but there needs to be some level of pain for a punishment to be a deterrent. If the cost of committing a crime is so low that it doesn’t discourage the behavior then it’s useless.
I wonder if the “mayor” paid the premiums on his errors and omissions policy.
Has the e&o carrier filed a dec relief action trying to deny coverage based on intentional acts and punies?
I wouldn’t assume Rudy has an E&O policy.
It is hard to picture at this point.
I’m so happy over this, I’m giddy. I’m in New Zealand right now and the headlines here show the verdict in NZ dollars as $238 million. That makes it even more pleasant to my ears. :)
I am wondering why Trump was not named as a defendant. What am I missing?
Ms. Freeman indicated that that work was “for another day” and I hope that these women get after Don and his campaign. They might have some pennies. Picking on black women is par for the course for these entitled white republican men. thanks everyone for the lively and smart exchanges here.
IANAL but I suspect Freeman and Moss are missing direct evidence on Trump. Fortunately for them, there are numerous other trials ongoing which might produce such evidence helpful to their case.
Their case is over with the possible exception of adjustment of the final verdict amount.
Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, falsely claimed that video footage showed the women engaging in “surreptitious illegal activity” and acting suspiciously, like drug dealers “passing out dope.” In early January, Trump himself singled out Freeman, by name, 18 times in a now-famous call in which he pressed Georgia officials to alter the state’s results. He called the 62-year-old temp worker a “professional vote scammer,” a “hustler” and a “known political operative” who “stuffed the ballot boxes.”
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-election-threats-georgia/
My guess as to some of the issues, albeit as not a US lawyer is as follows.
Re proof against Trump based on the call to Raffensperger:
Therein, perhaps lies the tactical issue about when to launch a defamation case against Trump and how to frame and plead it.
The contention that the comments made during that call were part of a campaign of defamation deployed for disinformation purposes, will be easier to plead and prove as the evidence emerges from the relevant criminal proceedings, and the issue of Presidential civil immunity would be easier to deal with.
Refraining from launching a civil claim against Trump for $$millions, until after giving evidence about him in the criminal trials, will also insulate Freeman and Moss, to some extent, from attempts to impeach their testimony on cross-examination in such trials on the grounds of having an overt and explicit financial interest in the outcome of the criminal trials.
IANAL also, but the political-meets-legal stew we are living in has me learning.
If Freeman and Moss had named Trump as a defendant, their suit would likely have become enmeshed in complications due to Trump’s status as president at the time.
We’ve seen how Trump’s presidential immunity claims have complicated Jack Smith D.C. case against Trump. By leaving Trump out this case’s defendant list, that complication was avoided here.
Thanks for the reminder on the appeal bond. Aren’t there two parts? Bonding the judgment and bonding the opponent’s costs?
There’s the size of the judgment and what we have been told about his assets. So if he doesn’t have enough assets to obtain a bond to post pending appeal, what does he do? Some post trial motions (good luck with those given his lack of evidence at trial)? [Even if he can scrounge some bond from somewhere, given the likelihood of defeat on appeal, he ends up in the same loop.] Some kind of stipulated judgment and assignment of assets to the plaintiffs’ while he pursues insurance funds? Bankruptcy filing but to what end? Some sort of reduced settlement using some offshore funds that haven’t yet been revealed to us? Escape to Dubai?
I don’t think there will be any insurance coverage, but hope I am wrong. Doubt Rudy still had any attorney malpractice insurance by then, and even if he did, he was far from legal practice as he was more of a PR spokesperson for Trump. That is not a peril that will ever be covered. Even if he has a personal umbrella policy, hard to see it covering intentional torts such as defamation. Who would represent him on all this post trial work? That would be a thankless job.
So all he left is to seek pro loco representation?
I know loco when I see it, and I see it when looking Rudy’s way.
Well it certainly isn’t pro sane
So Trump declares Mar-a-Lago a “sanctuary city” and Rudy hangs there? Or off to Dubai?
I guess Rudy now can start preparing for another tremendous performance at the Hunter Biden lawsuit.
Hopefully, Rudy, will continue to reap the weight judgments on his ass for all the days he remains upright. May he die penniless in a paupers grave. A fitting end that the two black women he targeted brought him down a notch in the system he once worked, the rule of law. He remains an unbowed racist. Maybe a harder penalty is if they took his jack Daniels from him.
https://twitter.com/lawindsor?lang=en
December 15, 2023 Prettyman Courthouse
Lauren Windsor Independent Journalist: You’re America’s mayor. Why are you willing to risk it all for Donald Trump?
Giuliani: I’m a man of principle, I’ve always been a man of principle uh this is a fight of principle. I understand that I could have done a lot of things to make this go away, the reason I didn’t make it go away is through the American people. The election of 2020 has to be exposed because if not our country will not longer be a democracy. I know that. I know that in detail. I have the evidence in my, I’m not just talking about this case, taking about a lot of cases and I know that my country had a president imposed on it by fraud…who has caused…these are not conspiracy theories. These are facts.
Journalist: Where’s your evidence?
Giuliani: I am not allowed to present it. You see what she just did? You see what she just did? She didn’t allow me to present a stitch of evidence …
Hi Jenny, Thanks for that! I didn’t know who was asking the questions there. Here is a direct link to that Tweet:
https://twitter.com/lawindsor/status/1735796136839975251
5:57 PM · Dec 15, 2023
I spent 35 minutes listening to C-SPAN’s callers this morning (I seldom can stand more than 5 minutes) and was shocked to learn that (at least in C-SPANistan) that this trial and jury verdict had zero effect on self-identified Republican callers-in.
I had expected at least a few to have felt some empathy with underdogs.
The lack of empathy for others is from the lack of self-worth, self-value and self-love.
Majority of the Republican party follow an abusive man who lacks empathy and exploits humanity to the nth degree.
Not when the underdogs are Black women who refuse to let themselves be bulldozed by too-long-entitled white men like Rudy and Trump. Freeman and Moss represent a terrible threat to a dying power structure: the truth.
And when they stood outside and spoke with such dignity and grace, they refused to give MAGA fans a leg to stand on. That makes those conditioned to oppose them uncomfortable, as it should; maybe, with time to think (and a break from Fox News), they will listen to their hearts.
I fear they ARE listening to their hearts already.
I agree. At least that was what I experienced. In fact, one person who was forced to accept the consequences of their actions never stopped working their con. They so manipulated and duped other people that one influential idiot actually bragged about forgiving their flaws. It was nauseating, just like the behavior of Kevin McCarthy.
Some flies just never have the ability to avoid or escape the spiders’ webs. Those flies are too deceived to realize that having empathy for the spider is detrimental to their well being and to the well being of others. They identify too much with the power of the spider and think they can be one, too. Sociopaths in training.
Has Alex Jones paid a dime to any of the Sandy Hook plaintiffs? Will he? Has PO1135809 paid a dime to E. Jean Carroll? Will he? Won’t Rudy 9/11 just continue to enjoy his peance and freance for years to come, while the appeals process drags on?
I get that this is a win, per se, but how long will it be before any of the defendants in these cases actually has to pay up?
Trump has given $5.5 million to the court for the Carroll decision. It has not been transferred to Carroll while the appeal is pending, but it’s out of his hands for now and very possibly forever. He’s got a related case next month which will determine how much more he will have to pay Carroll.
Re: Alex Jones
Plaintiffs offered to settle for $85 mil. last month, Jones just countered with $55 mil.
Here is some information from the TRUMP indictment that pertains to GIULIANI in GEORGIA.
230801 Trump J6 Indictment [Contributed by emptywheel] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23894861-230801-trump-j6-indictment#document/p14/a2368864 []
12/3/20 GIULIANI, et al present to a GA Senate Judiciary sub-committee [TRUMP indictment at 21]
12/3/20 TRUMP Tweets “knowingly false” allegations [TRUMP indictment at 22]:
12/4/20 RAFFENSPERGER’s COO Gabriel STERLING debunks GIULIANI’s 12/3/20 presentation by Tweet: [TRUMP indictment at 23]
12/7/20 STERLING press conference; he reiterates “that the claim that there had been misconduct at State Farm Arena was false.” [TRUMP indictment at 23]
12/8/20 TRUMP calls GA Attorney General to pressure him to support an election lawsuit filed at SCOTUS by Texas AG Paxton [TRUMP indictment at 24] GA AG tells TRUMP “that officials had investigated various claims of election fraud in the state and were not seeing evidence to support them.”
12/8/20 Senior TRUMP Campaign Advisor Jason Miller email to advertising executive Larry Weitzner, “[w]ith respect to the persistent false claim regarding State Farm Arena” [TRUMP indictment at 25]
12/10/20 GIULIANI testifies at Hearing before GA House of Representatives’ Government Affairs Committee, where he plays the debunked State Farm Arena video again, and falsely claims that it shows “voter fraud right in front of people’s eyes” and was “the tip of the iceberg.” [TRUMP indictment at 26]
Some transcriptions of GIULIANI at the 12/10/20 GA House Hearing:
https://nitter.net/BrendanKeefe/status/1337098137769549826
Dec 10, 2020 · 5:43 PM UTC [THREAD with 2 VIDEOs]
I have been counsel on a number of nondischarge cases, and I agree. You have to have a second trial in his bankruptcy to establish “willful and malicious injury” under 523(a)(6). Defamation does not automatically qualify. The focus is on the subjective state of mind when committing defamation. His remarks outside court during trial do not automatically make the case. If Rudy subjectively and actually believed in his defamatory remarks (even if stupid and unreasonable), it would not be willful or malicious. But claiming you have proof that it is true, but never producing it at trial nor in discovery, would suggest that you knew it was false at all times. You will have a second trial on the elements unique to the statutory definition for nondischarge.
I commented earlier, but subsequently read the details about the verdict. It included a $75,000,000 punitive damage award. That may guarantee non-discharge as a wilful and malicious injury depending on the details of Georgia law as to when punitive damages are awardable. Another important factor is the details of the jury verdict form that was used, and the extent to which it included specific factual conclusions that bind Rudy under collateral estoppel from fighting the issues in bankruptcy (once the trial decision is final).
No, and it has nothing to do with GA state law. BK is a federal issue, not a local one. Punitive damages are irrelevant, the non-dichargeability would putatively emanate from the intentional tort basis.
It will be interesting to see what discovery in aid of execution under FRCP 69 Freeman & Moss pursue; and whether Rudy will respond to it or not. I would imagine that failure to respond leads to a contempt citation and all the penalties that might follow therefrom.
https://www.federalrulesofcivilprocedure.org/frcp/title-viii-provisional-and-final-remedies/rule-69-execution/
[Welcome to emptywheel. Please choose and use a unique username with a minimum of 8 letters. We are moving to a new minimum standard to support community security. Thanks. /~Rayne]
I’m not sure if anyone else has mentioned this on the site, but apparently on Newsmax last night, he asked the “Tee Vee talking head guy”… for a LOAN — he asked if he could borrow a quick $148 million. [He was speaking to Tangerine, me thinks.]
Even on right wing TV, apparently that is STILL shocking to their “news-people”. The still screen-cap of the guy’s face is priceless.
And there is zero chance Tangerine will give / loan him the 10% ($14.8 million) he will need to prosecute his appeal, despite repeatedly telling the Newsmax moron he “is gonna’ win” on appeal.
You. Can’t. Get. There. From. Here.
Not without a fresh new $14.8 million.
And I agree — he is highly unlikely to be able to flush this in a chapter — and he may lose the FL homestead anyway, since he owes over half a million in back taxes on that — and I think the Manhattan property (on market for $6.1 million) is underwater — with various debts as well.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
I’ll never forget the video and images of his head leaking that dark brown goo, under the hot TV lights, while his then lawyer — now disbarred — Ms. Jenna Ellis (she plead guilty) grimaced behind him.
Classic!
Another Jenna grimace. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TqXtiQ20BLw
I blog but that’s separate, and believe I have not posted here before. You have my email address.
What struck me is seventy-five million awarded in punitive damages. The jury must have felt they needed to send a message beyond Rudy, to others.
Bankruptcy? These are two separate creditors. What does it take to force an involuntary Chapter 7? Same action, related plaintiffs, same judgment, but separate creditors. When counsel stated an intent to collect “every penny” it was hyperbole but when “to use every means available” was stated, that rang true and sensible.
Can these two, in this situation force Chapter 7; and would all means include consultation with other creditors of record to force Chapter 7? It seems getting Rudy there might distract him from other dilatory possibilities.
My understanding is that bankruptcy involves much discretionary powers with the court, and that fraud in disclosing assets would be criminal. With a full creditors list not yet public, a forced bankruptcy, creditor disclosure, and bone picking would shake out more news.
Reply to these thoughts and questioning would be greatly appreciated, some readers knowing more than I do would help me learn.
Last question, was this a unanimous jury verdict or split? I missed that detail if it was reported.
It was unanimous. BK is, in this scenario, an unlikely path out for Rudy. The verdict is presumptively non-dischargeable.
I mean, the guy hasn’t stopped. Even during court days he still goes and spouts the same lies that got him to court in the first place. I’d sure hope that would prompt any jury to turn the thumbscrews.
More procedural questions – reporting so far is a jury verdict. Has it been reduced to judgment, or will there need to be litigation over costs and attorneys fee award first?
Then, does there seem any chance Rudy under the circumstances could gain a Stay of Execution? What sort of showing could he likely make, and what might the court likely demand if he were to move for a stay?
In effect, what further wrap-up post-verdict might remain before the plaintiffs’ team can move into execution of judgment mode? What is the timing guess on this question?
Reporting seems to only talk of jury verdict so far. Is that wrong?
Last question to throw out – presuming there is only a verdict, no judgment to show up on a title policy yet, could a New York residence quick purchaser get title insurance while there is nationwide notice of the verdict? Would any firm write a policy w/o excluding any/all final outcome of the pending action? Subject to a court proceeding certificate’s listing of all known actions? How, practically, do title companies protect themselves in such a situation as Rudy finds himself?
And, yes, it seems there is no immediate purchase and sale contract yet, so it is all hypothetical. Yet, what’s the law, and the title insurance reality?
I suppose the title company could agree to cover the title subject to all net proceeds of the sale being held in escrow while some interpleader action sorts out the payees and their recoveries.