Rudy Giuliani ordered to pay $148 million in defamation trial

[JustOneWay]

I miss the days when left wing liberals weren't prosecuting their political opponents thereby causing election interference.

You are saying that Willis and Smith are political opponents to Trump?

Please provide any evidence that either of them have started a Presidential election run.

 

[essentialsaltes]

This is a lengthy post from Congresswoman Stefanik demonstrating why Judge Beryl Howell is

I think the Congresswoman doth file ethics complaints against judges too much.

Rep. Elise Stefanik files ethics complaint against judge in Trump's civil fraud trialThe senior House Republican and close Trump ally accused Judge Arthur Engoron of “weaponized lawfare” against the former president and called on the judge to recuse himself.​

 

[iluvatar5150]

I miss the days when left wing liberals weren't prosecuting their political opponents thereby causing election interference.

When would have been a time to prosecute Trump that didn't, in your opinion, constitute "election interference?

 

[Vambram]

How about anytime a former president decided to run for re-election?

 

[Vambram]

I think the Congresswoman doth file ethics complaints against judges too much.

Rep. Elise Stefanik files ethics complaint against judge in Trump's civil fraud trialThe senior House Republican and close Trump ally accused Judge Arthur Engoron of “weaponized lawfare” against the former president and called on the judge to recuse himself.​

Could it be because judges have become too political? Thereby becoming activists themselves?

 

[Vambram]

You are saying that Willis and Smith are political opponents to Trump?

Please provide any evidence that either of them have started a Presidential election run.

Please ask a legitimate question.

 

[iluvatar5150]

How about anytime a former president decided to run for re-election?

That would make first-term presidents immune to prosecution, potentially for life. What's the incentive there to never commit another crime? Do you not think it's bad enough that sitting presidents are, effectively, safe from prosecution?

 

[JustOneWay]

Trump is claiming election interference

Please ask a legitimate question.

It is very legitimate. You are saying that Trump is being prosecuted by his political opponents.

Since Biden has absolutely nothing to do with Trump's prosecution, you MUST be talking about the prosecutors themselves.

 

[JustOneWay]

That would make first-term presidents immune to prosecution, potentially for life. What's the incentive there to never commit another crime? Do you not think it's bad enough that sitting presidents are, effectively, safe from prosecution?

They WANT a dictator.

 

[Vambram]

They WANT a dictator.

No. You are incorrect.

 

[iluvatar5150]

No. You are incorrect.

A few years ago, I would have agreed with you. But now I'm not so sure. The widespread idolatrous fawning over Trump and the lengths to which folks will go to defend his behavior and those of his associates suggests to me that there are a lot of people in this country longing for an autocrat strongman.

 

[JustOneWay]

No. You are incorrect.

Sorry, but it is my OPINION! and it is correct. If you did not want a dictator you wouldn't be supporting Trump. Is your next comment to tell me you do not support Trump? Please let it be, so you can think back to this time after you vote for him.

 

[Vambram]

Sorry, but it is my OPINION! and it is correct. If you did not want a dictator you wouldn't be supporting Trump. Is your next comment to tell me you do not support Trump? Please let it be, so you can think back to this time after you vote for him.

Trump was not, nor will he be a dictator.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Trump was not, nor will he be a dictator.

Does Trump know that?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-moments-trumps-hannity-town-hall#:~:text=%E2%80%98DICTATOR'-,for"FOR"

 

[Vambram]

Does Trump know that?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-moments-trumps-hannity-town-hall#:~:text=%E2%80%98DICTATOR'-,for"FOR"

Take stuff out of context, much?

 

[JustOneWay]

Does Trump know that?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-moments-trumps-hannity-town-hall#:~:text=%E2%80%98DICTATOR'-,for"FOR"

These people think Trump is just saying things he does not mean.

I can't understand why Trump supporters know so little about the man they want to make a dictator?

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

Take stuff out of context, much?

Please, explain the context here.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

This is a lengthy post from Congresswoman Stefanik demonstrating why Judge Beryl Howell is very clearly the wrong judge to have been chosen to preside and judge this case against Rudy Giuliani. In my opinion, Judge Beryl Howell is little more than a partisan leftist liberal.

How do you see things going differently had it been a different judge?

Judge's have to act in accordance with the law, and can't show political favoritism within their job capacity, but there's nothing that should suggest that a judge isn't allowed to have a political leaning. Our supreme court is full of people who have well-established political leanings.
(Spoiler alert, Clearance Thomas is conservative, Sotomayor is liberal.... shocking right?)


In this case involving Rudy, the facts are what they are.

He falsely accused 2 people of election fraud, by name (when they did no such thing), and it led to incessant harassment, death threats, and even threats to their children.

He admitted that he made the false statements about them

Rudy Giuliani concedes he made false statements about two Georgia election workers

Former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani admitted he made false statements about two Georgia election workers to resolve their litigation against him.

www.usatoday.com

The judge's only role in this case was to determine liable or not liable for defamation, the jury decided the dollar amount.

It would seem that it wouldn't matter if the judge was Noam Chomsky or Ben Shapiro (guys who are on opposite ends of the political spectrum), if a person says "yeah I did it", there's only one logical conclusion there, he's liable.


If you want to make an argument that the media/academia/entertainment unfairly blasts conservatives for things and engages in double standards...I'd likely have some points of agreement with you on that. But if you're looking to prove that point in an objective manner, Rudy is the wrong horse to hitch your wagon to...just sayin'

It'd be like if a liberal wanted to make the case that their side is unfairly accused of cronyism, and decided to go "all-in" on defending Rod Blagojevich or Bob Menendez against allegations.

 

[perplexed]

Wow,
if there is ANY verdict against a trump supporter many people will be convinced that
the verdict clearly proves the "deep state" has "weaponized" the justice system to punish Trump supporters

​

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Wow,
if there is ANY verdict against a trump supporter many people will be convinced that
the verdict clearly proves the "deep state" has "weaponized" the justice system to punish Trump supporters

​

Just the ones who ruin other people's lives through defamation.

They'd also have to bring some serious evidence to the table to suggest the jurors were somehow part of the "deep state", the Judge's only role in this case was to find him liable for the thing he admitted to doing, it was a jury (that both side would've had to agree to) that came up with the dollar amount.

Even per the conservative outlet The DailyWire,
Judge Howell appeared to be “taken aback by the high figure.”


As I said in my previous post, if conservatives are looking to make a case that they're unfairly targeted in certain realms (which I would actually agree with in limited contexts)...this is not the court case to designate as the "hill to die on".