I was thinking the same thing...
And the Rar judges said, “no talking about the election fraud evidence.”
Giuliani somewhat mournfully points out the Rat destruction of law.
How can they prove his claims were false and misleading if there hasn’t been a forensic audit in the swing states where voter fraud was alleged?
It's because there is absolutely no opposition from the Republican party.
Exactly!
Amazing timing on a LOT of actions.
I thought that was their job.
Exactly.
I am not make light of the a NY court's ruling, but here is something I heard in the Netflix series Ozark. I am paraphrasing:
Marty (He's a money launderer): I can live with myself, I just move money between accounts.
Helen (She's a Lawyer of a Mexican drug cartel): So can I, I just move words around.
That about sums it up. A criminal and a lawyer, err a criminal. I am not saying all lawyers are criminals, but all lawyers "move words around." That in itself is not criminal. It is the other stuff that lawyers do that is criminal. I don't see that here with Rudy.
Going a little off subject here, but I have a question.
This is going to sound sarcastic, but it really is not.
In order to practice law, you need a license issued by the state you are practicing in.
In order to get a license, you need to be a member of a private organization (bar association).
In order to become a member of this organization, you need to pass an exam issued by this organization.
This organization has requirements you must meet before you can take the exam.
Once you have a license, this organization can remove you from membership, and the state takes your license.
Any appeals will be heard by lawyers and judges that are members of this organization.
Here are my questions: How can a private organization cause someone to lose a state issued licence?
Who oversees this organization on the state level, to insure fairness?
If the person or people overseeing this are members of the organization itself, is that not a conflict of interest?
Our judicial system is looking more and more like Russia every day.
In their searing order, a panel of five judges cited Giuliani’s “demonstrably false and misleading statements,” made in his capacity as former President Donald Trump’s lawyer and with the intention of bolstering the baseless narrative that the 2020 election was stolen due to widespread fraud.
The DNC attack dogs have gotten their marching orders by text.