Trump Indictment Watch

Lawyers for the two Georgia election workers who won $148 million in damages from former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani last week filed a new lawsuit Monday, asking a federal judge to order him to stop repeating his damaging debunked claims about the poll workers and to immediately enforce the jury’s massive award before his assets are dissipated.

Ruby Freeman and Wandrea Arshaye “Shaye” Moss asserted that Giuliani is continuing to baselessly accuse the former Fulton County election workers of manipulating the absentee ballot count to steal the 2020 election from former president Donald Trump in Georgia. The former New York mayor repeated the allegations during and after his defamation damages trial last week, even as his lawyer conceded in court the claims were wrong.

“Everything I said about them is true,” Giuliani told reporters outside the courthouse after the first day of his trial on Dec. 11, adding, “Of course I don’t regret it. … They were engaged in changing votes.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/12/18/giuliani-defamation-lawsuit-georgia/

Rudy doubling down on the Big Lie.
 
In trial, Giuliani attorney Joseph D. Sibley IV told jurors that his client did not testify out of respect for the women, who “have been through enough,” adding, “Mr. Giuliani is a good man” even if “he hasn’t exactly helped himself with some of the things that happened in the past few days.”

After the verdict, Giuliani said he didn’t testify because he was afraid of being put in jail for contempt of court. He went on to say, falsely, that there was evidence jurors did not get to see supporting his accusations against Freeman and Moss. Giuliani is also under state criminal indictment in Georgia with Trump for related offenses and could have risked incriminating himself.

Freeman and Moss’s attorneys wrote Monday that they asked Giuliani to agree to stop making such false claims before bringing their new suit seeking a court order and legal fees but that Giuliani refused to agree.

“Defendant Giuliani’s statements, coupled with his refusal to agree to refrain from continuing to make such statements, make clear that he intends to persist in his campaign of targeted defamation and harassment. It must stop,” attorney Michael J. Gottlieb wrote for the plaintiff’s legal team in a 10-page filing, seeking a “targeted injunction” barring Giuliani from repeating his defamatory falsehoods.
 
[tw]1736940597842198912[/tw]

the full quote:

"This is the game they play. They just double down on stupid.
@RudyGiuliani
was one part of the chorus singing the fake news and the lies, and they just double down on it until we hold them accountable.
"But all things are going to come to pass in #Georgia.
"I cannot even remotely fathom that #DonaldTrump
-- by the time this plays out, and all these truths and half-truths and fake news are highlighted across our courtroom screens and our televisions -- that he's going to win Georgia. He's just not. It's not going to be possible by the time his reputation has continued to be soiled.
"And therefore, as #Republicans, we won't win back what should be the easiest
@WhiteHouse
to win in decades. We'll fumble the ball again and he'll lose like he did the two Senate seats for us here in Georgia."
 
"All that his testimony proves is that for a million or so dollars, some experts will say whatever you want them to say,"

"By doggedly attempting to justify every misstatement, Professor Bartov lost all credibility,"

Justice Arthur Engoron



From the response to Trumps motion to dismiss.
 
Engoron knows real estate and accounting better than the experts. lol

I can't wait until SCOTUS remarks about this judge's evaluation of Mar-a-Lago
 
Last edited:
Garmel said:
Engoron knows real estate and accounting better than the experts. lol

I can't wait until SCOTUS remarks about this judge's evaluation of Mar-a-Lago
Click to expand...

I also look forward to SCOTUS weighing in (or choosing to let lower court rulings stand) on this and other matters regarding very poorly chosen one. Many novel issues are being addressed by the courts and I suspect a few up them will require adjudication by SCOTUS.

Just remember though: SCOTUS is just another DC jury. So y'all will be free to claim bias, intimidation, etc if any rulings go against your boy.

Heads I win. Tails you lose.
 
nsacpi said:
I also look forward to SCOTUS weighing in (or choosing to let lower court rulings stand) on this and other matters regarding very poorly chosen one. Many novel issues are being addressed by the courts and I suspect a few up them will require adjudication by SCOTUS.

Just remember though: SCOTUS is just another DC jury. So y'all will be free to claim bias, intimidation, etc if any rulings go against your boy.

Heads I win. Tails you lose.
Click to expand...

lol. I'll be sure to file the missing persons report when you disappear.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Trump declared ineligible for the ballot by the Colorado Supreme Court via the insurrection clause. The Trump tards will cry but Trumps lawyer put up an absurdly bad defense. Almost like they wanted this result. According to Trumps lawyer in the case Jefferson Davis could have run for President and Obama could run for a third term.


https://apnews.com/article/trump-in...024-colorado-d16dd8f354eeaf450558378c65fd79a2
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court will knock it down but just a other reminder that nominating this guy is going to be a full year of court cases, INSURRECTION videos, and looking backwards.

Would be suicide but our party is led by really stupid people now
 
Y'all have to realize that SCOTUS is just another DC jury subject to intimidation from the woke mob. Don't get yer hopes up too high.
 
This obviously has no prayer of holding up but does have the benefit of getting more GOP support around Trump, which is of course the goal
 
If any of y'all feel frisky about this holding up at the SCOTUS please let me know. I wanna make some money off some suckers.
 
I'm trying to figure out a single legitimate cause that an unelected body could decide to ban a person from a ballot who is a US citizen and has not been convicted of a crime
 
So would your view be different if he were convicted of a crime. Or would the goalposts shift at that point.
 
Could a red state simply decide that Joe Biden has been treasonous by letting 6 million people through the border and this not be allowed on the ballot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top