PayPal

Saturday, May 12, 2018

Rudy Giuliani on Stormy Daniels’ Lawyer, Michael Avenatti: “I don’t get involved with pimps” (Video)

By Nicholas Stix

On Friday night, May 11, 2018, Chris Mathews and his Trump-hating Hardball crew of Mother Jones’ David Corn, The Atlantic’s Natasha Bertrand, Never-Trumper Republican Charlie Sykes and criminal defense attorney, Caroline Polisi targeted President Trump's attorney, Rudy Giuliani.

Mathews and his thugs assert that Giuliani is acting like a thug (when Mathews isn’t mocking Giuliani as “sounding like Dickens”—so which is it?!), throwing mud, and are implying that Giuliani should debate Avenatti, as if the latter were the embodiment of civility. He’s not. Avenatti’s entire role has been mudslinging.

Mathews, re Trump’s refusal to decide on meeting with Mueller until after the nuclear summit with North Korean dictator Kim: “How can they end this thing, if they won’t end it?” If that doesn’t give Mathews away to new watchers as a DPUSA operative, nothing will.

Meeting with Mueller wouldn’t end anything. It would just start the impeachment clock ticking. Everyone on the panel knows that.

Instead, they talk about Giuliani having no “coherent criminal defense strategy.” “Coherent criminal defense strategy”? There is no criminal case against the President, or any sitting President. One can only move against a sitting president politically, through the impeachment process, or the 25th Amendment. Mathews and his fellow operatives are trying to create legal facts on the ground.

The Atlantic’s Natasha Bertrand asserts that Mueller is already writing his report about the President’s “obstruction of justice,” and that he already has the President dead to rights for this crime.

Again, Robert Mueller cannot prosecute the President of the United States for obstruction of justice, or anything else.

The “case against” the President is itself the crime: A massive conspiracy of sedition, in order to undo the 2016 election.

Here’s the real reason Giuliani can’t possibly debate Avenatti. Avenatti would have nothing to lose in a debate, while Giuliani (read: his client, the President) would have everything to lose. Avenatti would constantly demand information that, if Giuliani revealed it, would violate attorney-client privilege and do Robert Mueller’s work for him. Avenatti knows this, as does everyone in the linked video. But they’re all too dishonest to admit it.

Another thing about defense attorneys who appear on leftwing MSM panels. When the host is seeking to destroy someone he is depicting as the bad guy, the “defenders” suddenly switch to rabid prosecutors and hanging judges. Identifying them as “defense attorneys,” is only to confuse the viewing public into thinking, “Gee, if even a veteran defense attorney thinks this guy should hang, he must really be guilty.”
 

Hardball | MSNBC

 

 



MSNBC
Published on May 11, 2018

No comments: