“THis is Rudy skillfully maneuviring the discovery process.”
There is nothing to discover. He’s already conceded that his accusations were baseless lies.
There is nothing to discover. He’s already conceded that his accusations were baseless lies.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
NO he said thaey were opinions that may be factually 9naccurate, and secoondly he said that expression of that opinion ( after watching the video) is protected 1st amendment speech. Wait untill Freeman has to explain what was happening in the video......that will be rich.
Rudy admitted nothing , and it is a masterful ploy in a civil suit.
Let me save you a lot of time. *I*, and my entire family will be voting for Trump.
Period.
You are doing nothing beneficial for the nation with your swipes at our nominee.
It is unfortunate that certain posters do not take the time to analyze this story and its context. It is part and parcel of how incompetent many have become in reading news stories. Why would an isolated story about a portion of a legal proceeding with a headline that does not match the detail be somehow proof positive of Guilianni being apparently a malicious congenital liar? So much more information is needed to draw such a conclusion and it simply does not exist. Certainly not in the superficial hustle-a-minute media. I get that some people oppose Rudy and those he chooses to associate with. Go for it. Free country (still, sort of). But you are not honestly saying this proves he willfully lied? The story clearly contradicts any such conclusion. Instead, at its core, this is a report of a defendant in a lawsuit deciding which allegations he will fight and which he will not fight. So, if I believe something to be true, like Covid vaccines are actually just like old-fashioned vaccines, and I assert same, but later it is determined that covid vaccines are actually more like flu shots which are not vaccines at all, then was I lying when I stated my belief? Of course not. That is all Guilianni is doing here, stating he won’t contest the purported new infomation that, if true, renders his prior statement false. In no way does it convert his prior statement to a lie. Also, the new information is simply another investigative process that concluded without charges against the women. There was no finding of truth there, nor of motive associated with the allegations that I am aware of. If you want to be credible, you should make credible arguments based on a reasoned appraisal of the facts, processes, and context. This is not an episode of NCIS that is resolved in an hour based on a contrivance called a script. This is real life and there are real people involved here regardless of what names people may wish to call them to try to implicate them by mere accusation. most reasonable people are not fooled by such tactics. I suggest writing something worthy of actual adult debate and interaction. Your style seems merely to express a dimissive attitude towards those who do not share your pre-determined political opinion. I sense you are not open to facts that may call such beliefs into question.