Rudy Giuliani ordered to pay $150 million in defamation case

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: liberalskeptic

I'm not religious at all, but always cracks me up when commie pieces of sh!t try to lecture religious people on what they should think.

And it always cracks me up when posters on online forums can't make a cogent argument so they must resort to name-calling. It doesn't really make your case you know.

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
Ohhh Augustus how Naive of you...

Is that the best you have? Show me how the Justice Department was involved in this civil case since you think it's so obvious.

I suspect, as usual, that there will be no supporting evidence forthwith.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Is that the best you have? Show me how the Justice Department was involved in this civil case since you think it's so obvious.

I suspect, as usual, that there will be no supporting evidence forthwith.

How does this get to 150 million? I know the breakdown so no need to post that, but the liberal courts seem to be using the civil courts as a weapon against conservatives. That is only my opinion, but there is a lot of crazy liberal crap going on and no one in the courts makes 100s of millions.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
How does this get to 150 million?

Ask the jury.

All monetary verdicts are subject to appeal so if America's Mayo decides to pay his attorneys maybe they will file one for him.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
Ask the jury.

All monetary verdicts are subject to appeal so if America's Mayo decides to pay his attorneys maybe they will file one for him.

So something is driving it all right? Do they now do the Dr. Evil thing with the pinky in the corner of the mouth? The videos are pretty damning that they were doing something not within the normal process and has it ever been proven they were not counting "extra" votes outside of the process with monitors?

So her life is ruined? Did she lose her 50k-a-year job or something..well no to all of it... I don't think outside of complaining on the internet no one actually did anything. But hey let's say we will have Rudy pay her a lifetime of 2x her possible earning potential. So how about 100k for the next 40 years = 4 million, not 150 million lol.

I'm just saying it seems liberals have found new weapons to use and we see it with Trump too. The other weapon is to just keep pushing people into the court system with no desire to win anything until they are broke and have no further means to fight.

Judges create a lot of this because they are the ones to say what they allow and what they will not allow, so if you have a Conservative hating progressive judge they are the ringmaster controlling it all. This is interesting in Trump's case that the judge donated to progressive groups including one to remove any Conservatives in office that didn't suggest Jan 6 was an insurrection. So let's say your judge is like this, how do you think it would affect the case with their total control on the court?

originally posted by: Xtrozero
The videos are pretty damning that they were doing something not within the normal process and has it ever been proven they were not counting "extra" votes outside of the process with monitors?

I guess if Rudy wanted it proven he would have presented all that evidence he's been claiming he's had for the past three years.

But he didn't. So hopefully he enjoys the poor house.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

I guess if Rudy wanted it proven he would have presented all that evidence he's been claiming he's had for the past three years.

But he didn't. So hopefully he enjoys the poor house.

All you need is for the judge to not allow it and it's done. You can have people "clean" up their evidence of wrongdoing and once again if officials say due to political bias there is nothing to see there with zero investigations then it is done before anything is started.

No one is arguing Rudy and others were stupid in their approaches in assuming the evidence would just materialize, but I don't think anything was even looked into at the levels that had the authority to do that. Rudy and company had zero authority to demand anything outside going through the court system already biased. Good luck there even if there was a smoking gun the size of a cannon that they could see but just not touch.

I also do not see the reason for the case when it is extremely hard to get someone on defamation, otherwise everyone would be suing everyone. This once again goes down the path the judge runs the show and allows the jury to do what they did.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
All you need is for the judge to not allow it and it's done.

He didn't even try, brohan.

a reply to: Xtrozero

"Good luck there even if there was a smoking gun the size of a cannon that they could see but just not touch."

But there wasn't one.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

But there wasn't one.

I guess we will never know...

originally posted by: Xtrozero

All you need is for the judge to not allow it and it's done. You can have people "clean" up their evidence of wrongdoing and once again if officials say due to political bias there is nothing to see there with zero investigations then it is done before anything is started.

While I agree with you, a judge who thinks a judgement is excessive will usually put it on hold. This judge ordered immediate payment. That makes me think he is not inclined to order it reduced.

There are three components to the award - actual, compensatory, and punitive. I do not think the actual damages awarded are in line with these women's actual damages. They were poll workers, low level government servants. I'm a professional whose reputation is very important to my livelihood. Yet, I'd put it's value closer to $1,000,000 or less, not what they got awarded. I'm not dissing them, just saying that this part of the verdict should be based on reality.

The compensatory damages, basically pain and suffering, are more challenging. Rudy admitted to acting with malice toward them. that makes them more likely to be upheld. They were awarded by a jury to reflect their opinion of what a national politicians attack on them was worth. Remember, they got death threats and had every reason to believe that some idiot might actually try to kill them. That's worth quite a bit.

Finally, the punitive damages need to be high enough to put the fear of financial ruin into any lawyer, politician, or PAC, democrat or republican that might consider this crap in the future.

As I've said, I think the total amount is excessive but I doubt the amount will be reduced. The trial judge has already signaled he will not. Appeals courts and SCOTUS look for reversible error. They very rarely tweak judgement amounts.

originally posted by: liberalskeptic
Remember, they got death threats and had every reason to believe that some idiot might actually try to kill them. That's worth quite a bit.

The key point here is they did get some rants, but no one physically tried anything. People were not protesting outside their house for example as we see Liberals do. I would say if online rants went further than just that then I see more along these lines, but it didn't.

Finally, the punitive damages need to be high enough to put the fear of financial ruin into any lawyer, politician, or PAC, democrat or republican that might consider this crap in the future.

As I've said, I think the total amount is excessive but I doubt the amount will be reduced. The trial judge has already signaled he will not. Appeals courts and SCOTUS look for reversible error. They very rarely tweak judgement amounts.

10 million is fear, 150 million is stupid. So the next time we see riots from liberals and politicians helping pay their bonds I guess anyone damaged or worse by those mobs and sue for much more. We know that isn't going to happen because when it's a conservative that brings out the big BAM! stick and when it's a liberal its "nothing to see here" or seen as a good thing.

July 2, 2024

Because he is PRO-TRUMP, former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani has lost his license to practice law in New York state.

www.axios.com...

The criminals in charge of New York say it's because he said there was cheating during the 2020 Election.

Every lawyer in New York who doesn't think Biden won legitimately in 2020 can now be disbarred?

Being ejected from New York is a "Badge of Honor".

-wmc

a reply to: WeMustCare

"The panel of judges wrote in the court filing that Giuliani "communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers, and the public at large" regarding the 2020 election.
They also said he "flagrantly misused" his position as Trump's lawyer and "deliberately violated some of the most fundamental tenets of the legal profession."

From your link.

Bit more to it than that.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: WeMustCare

"The panel of judges wrote in the court filing that Giuliani "communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers, and the public at large" regarding the 2020 election.
They also said he "flagrantly misused" his position as Trump's lawyer and "deliberately violated some of the most fundamental tenets of the legal profession."

From your link.

Bit more to it than that.

So no citing actual things, just saying vague Leftanese language as per the norm?

a reply to: Kaiju666

Au contraire, mon ami.

The full Court Filing can be found in the Axios link.

All 31 pages.

Citing, actual things.

Not vague, at all.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

"communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers, and the public at large"

Is that like….

The Steele dossier hoax

Russia Russia Russia collusion hoax

Very fine people hoax

Insurrection starter hoax

Muslim ban hoax

Don’t say gay hoax

Book ban hoax

Covid came from a wet market hoax

Hunter laptop was Russian disinfo hoax

Border patrol whipping illegals hoax


I could go on but I’m guessing you get it.
This is just more evidence that there’s two tiers of justice going on.

a reply to: Vermilion

No it isn't. He's (was) a lawyer and has duties to the Court and a Professional Code of Conduct to abide by.

Did you read all 31 pages?

It's all pretty clear.

And damning.

These were disciplinary proceedings and he deserves no sympathy.

a reply to: Vermilion

None of that is relevant to Rudi's debarring.

Read the actual reasons rather than your political spin and Ill informed opinion.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

I did. Please tell me what is so 'damning' he should be disbarred.

Link

The disciplinary charges stem from the allegations that respondent communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers, and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump’s failed effort at reelection in 2020. These false statements were made to improperly bolster respondent's narrative that due to widespread voter fraud, victory in the 2020 United States presidential election was stolen from his client.

A lawyer since 1969 and one of the best mayors NY has seen. He talks against the narrative and is disbarred.

Facts.