General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRudy Giuliani Laughs At Subpoena On Fox News: 'They Seem To Forget That I'm A Lawyer'
Just hours after being issued a subpoena from top congressional Democrats, Rudy Giuliani appeared on Fox News to defend his involvement with Ukraine, actions that have become central to an impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump.
Trumps personal attorney appeared on Sean Hannitys program as part of his latest effort to distance himself from the political whirlwind surrounding Trumps July 25 call with the Ukrainian president.
During the Hannity segment, Giuliani appeared to question the motives behind the subpoenas while defending his communications with officials in Ukraine about investigating former Vice President Joe Biden, a top Trump rival in the 2020 presidential campaign. He also reminded viewers that he was a professional lawyer as he pushed unfounded conspiracy theories targeting a spate of his bosss political rivals.
These people are such intellectual heavyweights, I dont know if I could handle Schiff, Giuliani said Monday, appearing to joke about Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the chair of the House Intelligence Committee who recently sent him a subpoena.
https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/rudy-giuliani-fox-news-subpoenas-022445729.html
Hubris hasn't worked out so well for Trump so you might want to tone it down a bit Rudy.
Doreen
(11,686 posts)They also remember you are a crappy one.
Backseat Driver
(4,399 posts)that most Professional Codes of Ethics are just laughable these days and backed up by "legal beagles" that really don't have any. I know, for example, that claims against real estate brokers for misconduct have an extremely short reporting time period, essentially over before the victim knows what hit 'em. Good luck finding those who will fight again banking and insurance giants, corporate labor, or government shake-downs of low- to no income American citizens unless it will go mainstream high-profile.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,869 posts)and many of the other Watergate miscreants who wound up in prison.
FakeNoose
(32,777 posts).... and no Rudy, you can't handle Adam Schiff. You're a fool if you think you can.
blogslut
(38,018 posts)Keep digging that hole.
RockRaven
(15,012 posts)This almost as dumb as Jr claiming attorney-client privilege on a convo with Dump45 because there was a lawyer in the room. Schiff isn't going to let that slide like Mueller did.
TeamPooka
(24,259 posts)lindysalsagal
(20,733 posts)The good ole days.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)Of course lawyers are called to testify all the time. One of the funniest cross-examinations I've ever seen is when Yale Galanter had to testify regarding his defense of OJ Simpson in Simpson's armed robbery trial.
riversedge
(70,310 posts)Jarqui
(10,130 posts)the House subpoenas.
Explainer: How powerful are Congress subpoenas, contempt citations?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-congress-subpoena-explainer/explainer-how-powerful-are-congress-subpoenas-contempt-citations-idUSKCN1S81FP
What Can Congress Do If Flynn (Or Anyone Else) Refuses to Comply With a Subpoena?
https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-can-congress-do-if-flynn-or-anyone-else-refuses-comply-subpoena
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/fining-william-barr-congresss-best-option/589798/
The criminal-contempt statute, passed in 1857, makes it a federal crime to defy congressional subpoenas. Congress has the option of asking the Justice Department to sue anyone held in contempt for violating this federal law. If Congress succeeds in obtaining a favorable judgment, the judge can order the contemner to be jailed or fined. But, not surprisingly, if the individual held in contempt is an executive-branch official, Justice will likely refuse to sue him or heras it has in every case involving a federal official in the past 10 years.
,,,
First, courts are hesitant to entertain disputes that involve a tug-of-war between two branches of the government. Second, litigating the matter in courts can be time-consuming in practice, so its not helpful when Congresss main concern is expediting access to information. In the past, similar cases have dragged out in the courts for long enough that the requesting Congress and the incumbent administrations terms both expired before reaching a resolution.
There does not seem to be definitive teeth for Congress to enforce it's subpoenas
Trump et al are lawless. They're not going to comply.
LuckyCharms
(17,460 posts)lame54
(35,326 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,758 posts)area51
(11,923 posts)You really want to go there, regarding "intellectual heavyweights"?
WhiteTara
(29,722 posts)lindysalsagal
(20,733 posts)questions because of client/presidential privilege."
They really think their circular reasoning will work.
Flaleftist
(3,473 posts)MiniMe
(21,719 posts)lastlib
(23,308 posts)you're a pretty damn poor one!