insidious R.U.D.Y. “something we have to deal with”
Rudy can’t help himself, he just keeps confessing. The question remains whether he will get to do that under oath before Congress.
The investigation I conducted concerning 2016 Ukrainian collusion and corruption, was done solely as a defense attorney to defend my client against false charges, that kept changing as one after another were disproven.
— Rudy W. Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) November 6, 2019
I am represented and assisted by Robert Costello and the Pierce Bainbridge firm in particular , Eric Creizman and Melissa Madrigal.
— Rudy W. Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) November 6, 2019
“…it would be a shock if he talks. Rudy knows what the boss thinks of snitches.”
Even with Rudy keeping his mouth uncharacteristically closed in recent weeks, the picture other people have painted shows that the initial impression many of us had about his involvement in this whole mess was inaccurate. Rudy did not “go rogue” as some would have it. He was not freelancing, or throwing around President Trump’s name to get what he wanted.
In fact, people throughout the foreign policy and national security apparatus in the Trump administration seem to not only have been aware of the shadow Ukraine policy Giuliani was spearheading, they changed their own behavior to accommodate it.
We should remind ourselves how shocking this is. The president’s “personal lawyer” does not get to jet around the world making foreign policy while ordering government officials to do his bidding. He just doesn’t. That’s not how it works.But that’s exactly what he was doing. Giuliani appeared to have two sets of goals: coercing the Ukrainian government into taking action that would benefit Trump’s reelection bid, and scooping up gobs of cash for himself and his goons Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who are currently enjoying the hospitality of the Bureau of Prisons..@paulwaldman1: Giuliani is the central figure, and he has not valid attorney client privilege claim not to testify. He needs to be called.https://t.co/XAJQQvpYKu
— Harry Litman (@harrylitman) November 6, 2019
It’s obviously imperative that Giuliani answer questions under oath about his role in this scandal. If he wants to assert his Fifth Amendment rights to stay silent, that’s his prerogative. What he can’t do, however, is claim that any of this is covered by attorney-client privilege; that privilege would only apply to legal advice he gives a client, and none of this qualifies. Nor can he assert executive privilege, since that only applies to people with official government roles.
