SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
january 6
Giuliani Ordered to Give NYC Penthouse, Luxury Items to Georgia Election Workers He Defamed
'This outcome should send a powerful message that there is a price to pay for those who choose to intentionally spread disinformation," said a lawyer representing the two women.
Oct 22, 2024
Rudy Giuliani, the disgraced and disbarred former New York City mayor and personal attorney for ex-President Donald Trump, was ordered by a federal judge on Tuesday to hand over all of his valuable possessions—including everything from a New York City penthouse co-op to his television set—to a pair of Georgia election workers whom he defamed in service of Trump's "Big Lie" that the 2020 presidential election was stolen by Democrats.
In August 2023, Judge Beryl Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found Giuliani liable for defaming Ruby Freeman and ArShaye "Shaye" Moss—who worked as election officials in Fulton County, Georgia—by falsely accusing the pair of engaging in a nonexistent conspiracy to "steal" the 2020 U.S. presidential election from Trump by taking part in a fake ballot harvesting scheme. Freeman and Moss endured death threats and harassment from Trump supporters as a result of the bogus accusation.
Last December, a Washington, D.C. jury ordered Giuliani to pay $148 million in damages to the women. He subsequently declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
On Tuesday, Judge Lewis Liman of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued an order for Giuliani "to transfer all personal property specified" in an attached list, including "cash accounts, jewelry and valuables, a legal claim for unpaid attorneys' fees, and his interest in his Madison Avenue co-op apartment to a receivership" benefiting Freeman and Moss.
In addition to the co-op—which according to the real estate website Zillow has three bedrooms, three bathrooms, and is worth an estimated $20.6 million—items on the list include watches gifted by European leaders after the September 11, 2001 attack on the United States, a 1980 Mercedes-Benz 500SL formerly owned by the actress Lauren Bacall, and sports memorabilia including a signed Joe DiMaggio jersey.
"We are proud that our clients will finally begin to receive some of the compensation to which they are entitled for Giuliani's actions," Aaron Nathan, an attorney who represented Freeman and Moss, said in a statement. "This outcome should send a powerful message that there is a price to pay for those who choose to intentionally spread disinformation."
"The road to justice for Ruby and Shaye has been long, but they have never wavered," Nathan added.
Giuliani has paid a heavy price for purveying election fraud lies that culminated in the January 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection by supporters of Trump, the 2024 Republican nominee. His credibility is now in tatters and he has been permanently stripped of his New York and Washington, D.C. law licenses.
And his troubles are far from over—Giuliani also faces criminal charges related to alleged election subversion in
Arizona and Georgia.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'No One Is Above the Law'—Oh Really, Mr. Biden?
Year after year and decade after decade, the courts have shielded presidents from accountability for perpetuated crimes committed either by the White House or by the president’s administration.
Jun 01, 2024
After the jury came in with its verdict that Donald Trump was guilty of a scheme and coverup to illegally influence the 2016 election, the Biden campaign issued a statement saying that the judgment demonstrated that “no one is above the law,” not even a former President. The overwhelming truth is that the majority of criminal laws are not a deterrent to the serious violations of law committed by sitting presidents of the United States.
This includes the incumbent Joe Biden, especially with regard to foreign and military decisions.
At least five long-standing federal laws explicitly condition the shipment of weapons to foreign countries. It is legally impermissible for the U.S. government to provide weapons to countries that violate human rights or use these weapons offensively. Day after day, Joe Biden has become a co-belligerent with Netanyahu’s genocidal war crimes and mass slaughter of innocent children, women and men. He has violated all five of these federal laws. (See my February 16, 2024 column: Biden & Blinken – Rule of Illegal Power Over Rule of Law).
Presidents operate in a system of considerable sovereign immunity, and law that either can’t or has not breached this shielded impunity. They really are above the criminal laws.
As the military, diplomatic and political enabler of the Israeli government’s siege, with the unconditional shipment of weapons of mass destruction, along with civilian bombardment and starvation of defenseless Palestinians in Gaza, Biden is violating the UN Charter and other treaties that past Administrations have signed and that have been ratified by the U.S. Senate. Biden and other presidents act like they are above these and other laws.
One president after another has spent monies not appropriated by Congress, has defied subpoenas issued by Congress, launched wars undeclared by Congress, sent deadly weapons to nations that obstruct the delivery of U.S. humanitarian aid, and that do not protect civilian populations under foreign military rule. All violations of federal law.
Donald Trump in 2019 brazenly stated the lawlessness in one sentence: “ I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President.” Trump got away with defying over 125 Congressional subpoenas, and with violating the criminal statute known as the Hatch Act by using the White House and other federal property to promote his re-election campaign. Then of course there was the January 6 insurrection, and the likely delay of his trial until after the election, if at all.
Joe Biden shuffles around unappropriated monies, continues to allow the violation of a 1992 federal law requiring the Pentagon to provide Congress with an audited military budget, and is constantly sending unlawful armed incursions into other weaker countries with impunity.
To make matters easier for presidents, there is the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel memo, from decades ago, that asserts there can be no criminal prosecution initiated against a sitting president.
As attorney Bruce Fein, who worked in the Office of Legal Counsel, has said repeatedly, this baseless opinion has no legal force and should be rescinded. (See, Letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, May 31, 2024).
The courts have shielded presidents from accountability for perpetuated crimes committed either by the White House or by the president’s administration. For example, citizens have no “standing to sue,” to challenge in court a variety of Executive Branch abuses says the Supreme Court, not even members of Congress. As for presidential violations of the Constitution and federal laws by launching illegal wars or armed attacks abroad, the courts dismiss such cases, saying they raise “political questions” outside the jurisdiction of the courts.
Being allowed to get away with crimes is what constitutional law specialist Bruce Fein calls “a way of life at the White House.” Obstruction of justice or deliberate non-enforcement of seriously violated laws marks every presidency. Trump just boasted about what he inherited and intensified it.
Again, presidents operate in a system of considerable sovereign immunity, and law that either can’t or has not breached this shielded impunity. They really are above the criminal laws. Only the very difficult political penalty of impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by two-thirds of the Senate can only evict them from office, after which they are free to enjoy life, and receive huge lecture fees and large book advances.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Ethical Nightmare': House Democrats Demand Alito Recuse From Trump Cases
"The fact of such a political statement at your home creates, at minimum, the appearance of improper political bias."
May 21, 2024
Citing recent reporting that an inverted American flag—an alleged symbol of the "Stop the Steal" election denialism stoked by former U.S. President Donald Trump—was flown at the home of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito following January 6, 2021, 45 House Democrats on Tuesday demanded his recusal from all cases involving the right-wing insurrection or 2020 presidential contest.
Earlier this month, The New York Timesrevealed that the inverted flag flew in front of Alito's home in Alexandria, Virginia during the period between the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters and the inauguration of President Joe Biden.
"It is incontrovertible that at the time the upside-down flag flew from your front lawn, 'Stop the Steal' activists had adopted the inverted flag as their symbol of protest. Their belief that widespread election fraud had thrown the election from former President Trump to then-President-Elect Biden has never been supported by any evidence," a letter signed by the Democrats states.
The lawmakers cite a section of the U.S. Flag Code—which is legally unenforceable—barring the display of inverted American flags "except as a signal of dire distress in instance of extreme danger to life or property."
"No such dire distress was in existence at the time the inverted flag flew from your front yard," the letter notes. "Indeed, your own public statement attempts to pass responsibility to your wife, but you nonetheless acknowledge that it was a political statement in support of Donald Trump's effort to overturn the 2020 election."
Alito told the Times he "had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag," which he said "was briefly placed by Mrs. Alito in response to a neighbor's use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs."
The lawmakers' letter continues:
Even if you had "no involvement" in the display yourself, the fact of such a political statement at your home creates, at minimum, the appearance of improper political bias. According to Canon 5 of the recently promulgated, non-binding, non-enforceable U.S. Supreme Court ethics guidelines, on which you are listed as a signatory, a justice "should refrain from political activity." In fact, the court's own employee guidelines explicitly prohibit public displays of political views—including yard signs and bumper stickers—because they create an appearance of a conflict of interest...
In Canon 3B, the guidelines declare that "a justice should disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the justice's impartiality might reasonably be questioned, that is, where an unbiased and reasonable person who is aware of all relevant circumstances would doubt that the justice could fairly discharge his or her duties."
There are currently two cases related to January 6 and the 2020 election before the court. Trump v. United Statesconcerns the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee's claim he has absolute presidential immunity for any official acts—in this case, trying to subvert the 2020 election—while Fischer v. United States is about whether January 6 insurrections committed felony obstruction of an official proceeding.
"Sadly, you are now the second justice who has demonstrated at least an appearance of a conflict of interest related to the events surrounding the January 6 insurrection," the letter laments. "In the aftermath of the 2020 election, text messages revealed that Virginia 'Ginni' Thomas, the wife of Justice Clarence Thomas, was actively strategizing with the White House chief of staff about how to overturn the election results and attending the January 6 'Stop the Steal' rally—precisely the same underlying conduct charged in Trump and Fischer."
"Although Justice Thomas seemingly acknowledged this conflict of interest by recusing himself from the court's case related to Trump attorney John Eastman, he has shockingly refused to recuse himself from Trump and Fischer," the lawmakers noted.
"Undoubtedly, public trust and confidence in the Supreme Court is in shambles, which jeopardizes our democracy and the rule of law upon which it is based. And given that your decisions in Trump and Fischer will profoundly affect the future of a past and potentially future president, and of democracy itself, it is essential that the court attempt to bolster the public's trust in the integrity of the court," the letter to Alito states.
"In order to protect the legitimacy of the court's ultimate decision in these historic cases," it concludes, "it is clear that both you and Justice Thomas must recuse yourselves from participating any further in these, or any other cases, related to January 6 or the 2020 election."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular