Giuliani political adviser Ted Goodman, in response to the ruling, said, "This 57 page opinion on discovery -- which would usually be no more than two or three pages -- is a prime example of the weaponization of the justice system, where the process is the punishment. This decision should be reversed."
The headline is a mid-item paragraph from ABCnews coverage. Later, a thought about why the word "weaponization" was italicized here, not in the original.
First, reporting is of Rudy's getting deservedly reamed yesterday in a 57 page default judgment issued by the trial judge in a Georgia federal court defamation action filed by two election workers, Ruby Freeman and her daughter. Separate from that civil action for damages, readers may scan the online Georgia indictment against Trump, et al. for mention of Ruby Freeman, for background.
A federal judge on Wednesday
awarded a default judgment to a pair of Georgia election workers as part
of their civil defamation suit against former Trump attorney Rudy
Giuliani, who also faces separate criminal charges in Fulton County.
The
mother-daughter tandem of Ruby Freeman and Wandrea "Shaye" Moss are
suing the former New York City mayor for defamation over erroneous
remarks he made accusing the pair of fraudulently manipulating ballots on Election Day 2020 in Georgia.
In
the days after the election, Freeman and Moss became the subjects of a
Trump-backed conspiracy theory that was later found to be "false and
unsubstantiated," according to an investigation
by the Georgia Elections Board. Giuliani, in an appearance before a
committee of the Georgia state legislature, told lawmakers that a video
circulating online showed "Ruby Freeman and Shaye Freeman Moss ... quite
obviously surreptitiously passing around USB ports, as if they're vials
of heroin or cocaine."
For
months, Giuliani has rebuffed the pair's efforts to obtain relevant
discovery materials in the case. As a result, U.S. Judge Beryl Howell
found Giuliani on Wednesday liable for his defamatory remarks, levelled
harsh sanctions against him -- including the default judgment -- and
ordered a trial to determine the complete scope of damages.
"Giuliani
has given only lip service to compliance with his discovery obligations
... and thwarted plaintiffs Ruby Freeman and Wandrea 'Shaye' Moss'
procedural rights to obtain any meaningful discovery in this case,"
Howell wrote.
Howell, in her
57-page opinion, accused Giuliani of skirting discovery rules under the
guise of what he called "punishment by process" -- seeking to frame
himself as a victim of unfair persecution.
"Donning
a cloak of victimization may play well on a public stage to certain
audiences," Howell wrote, "but in a court of law this performance has
served only to subvert the normal process of discovery."
[image omitted]
Giuliani has previously stated
[see: 2 page nolo contendre filing] that he "does not contest the factual allegations" made by Freeman and
Moss regarding his statements, but that his statements were
"constitutionally protected."
On
Wednesday, Howell wrote that "Giuliani's stipulations hold more holes
than Swiss cheese" and "make clear his goal to bypass the discovery
process."
Howell speculated that
Giuliani's efforts to withhold discovery in this matter could reflect a
strategy meant to quell his growing legal exposure in other cases --
including the criminal charges he now faces in Fulton County, where he
and 18 others were charged earlier this month in a sweeping racketeering indictment for alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state.
"Perhaps,
he has made the calculation that his overall litigation risks are
minimized by not complying with his discovery obligations in this case,"
Howell wrote. "Whatever the reason, obligations are case specific and
withholding required discovery in this case has consequences."
Freeman and Moss, in a statement, lauded the ruling.
"Rudy
Giuliani helped unleash a wave of hatred and threats we never could
have imagined," their statement said. "It cost us our sense of security
and our freedom to go about our lives. Nothing can restore all we lost,
but today's ruling is yet another neutral finding that has confirmed
what we have known all along: that there was never any truth to any of
the accusations about us and that we did nothing wrong. We were smeared
for purely political reasons, and the people responsible can and should
be held accountable."
[...] Giuliani
political adviser Ted Goodman, in response to the ruling, said, "This
57 page opinion on discovery -- which would usually be no more than two
or three pages -- is a prime example of the weaponization of the justice
system, where the process is the punishment. This decision should be
reversed."
The ruling compounds the legal jeopardy for Giuliani at a time when he and Trump are both among 19 defendants
charged this month in a racketeering case related to efforts to
overturn the 2020 election in Georgia. It also creates the potential for
a massive financial penalty for Giuliani as the case proceeds to a
federal trial in Washington, where a jury would determine damages he may
be liable for.
He
will have a “final opportunity” to produce the requested information,
known under the law as discovery, but could face additional sanctions if
he fails to do so. In the meantime, Howell said, Giuliani and his
business entities must pay more than $130,000 in attorneys’ fees.
Howell
expressed skepticism at Giuliani’s claims that he cannot afford to
reimburse the plaintiffs in the case, noting that he recently listed his
apartment in Manhattan for $6.5 million and was reported to have flown
via private plane to Atlanta to surrender to charges there. He has
pleaded not guilty.
[...] Howell said that aside from an initial document production of 193 pages,
the information Giuliani had turned over consisted largely of “a single
page of communications, blobs of indecipherable data” and “a sliver of
the financial documents required to be produced.”
[...] Giuliani has blamed his failure to produce the requested documents on
the fact that his devices were seized by federal investigations in 2021
as a part of a separate Justice Department investigation that did not
produce any criminal charges.
[...] Last month, Giuliani conceded that he made public comments
falsely claiming the election workers committed ballot fraud during the
2020 election, but he contended that the statements were protected by
the 1st Amendment.
That caveated stipulation, [link] Howell said, has
“more holes than Swiss cheese” and suggested Giuliani was more
interested in conceding the workers’ claims than actually producing
meaningful discovery in the case.
“Yet, just as taking shortcuts
to win an election carries risks — even potential criminal liability —
bypassing the discovery process carries serious sanctions, no matter
what reservations a noncompliant party may try artificially to preserve
for appeal,” she said.
So, Rudy is claiming impecuniary status while facing an award of attorneys fees. Rudy might be running short of cash because of all the litigation cost arising from his volitional bad conduct. Get out the crying towel for poor Rudy.
Whining time: "Weaponization of the justice system" is an exceedingly unappealing usage appearing to have arisen in Repuclican House hearings and in other Republican keening over Trump's having to face consequences of his actions. The usage is so bothering that it should immediately cease as an affront to the English language.
Yes -- It is being said that Biden et al. have "weaponized" the Justice Department. Oh my! What to say?
Biden has been in DC a long time and seen and digested much that went on. (As in having a learning curve.) When searching Wikipedia's entry for Mitch McConnell given his recent health indications, this paragraph stood out, as relevant to Biden's lengthy DC experiential Gestalt:
The "Weaponization of the Justice Department" reality clearly is no new invention to Biden and Garland. Republicans reap as they've sown, and have no justification whatsoever in whining over goes-around-comes-around political activity.
The world would spin better on its axis if those using the offensive term would simply stop. Biden was schooled into how to negotiate DC, and the fact that his Justice Department is charging Trump with crimes, and Rudy with crimes, hinges upon their having had ample opportunity to act differently but choose to break laws.
How each new indictment gives Trump a polling boost and further cashflow astounds by its inexplicable happening. How anyone can suggest the man is beyond accountability for his past actions, indeed, past crimes, remains a mystery.
As to those being polled and giving up money based upon each new indictment - WTF are these people?
__________UPDATE__________
From reading the 57p Default Order, it is clear that Rules of Civil Procedure related to Discovery permit a judge, at her/his discretion, to impose a range of punitive measures when it appears to the Court that reasonable discovery has intentionally been frustrated. Of interest, the duty to preserve evidence is not specified in detail by rule, and a question for each person reading of this handling of the two election workers lawsuit is to consider personal data handling, such as timely backup, etc.
Reasonable people might negligently backup data. What is reasonable for Guiliani being in politics doing what he did, with the background he has, might differ for a Crabgrass reader who has experienced a disc crash.
When we lose data, or are disorganized in keeping it for retrieval, it usually proves to have no severe consequences. We live with it. Should we be hauled into court, we can perhaps sympathize with one who has difficultly in honestly trying to comply with discovery requirements. But Giuliani was a prosecutor, mayor of the largest city in the nation, and doing things where a reasonable person in such a situation might anticipate trouble. The trial judge held power to hold Giuliani in contempt and order him held in custody until he purged the contempt, but did not exercise that power, yet. We can all learn from this clearly unique situation, but easy bad habits will persist. The point is we likely will never be sued. If sued, we comply with duties in good faith. That is all we can do. A judge of Giuliani can have a sliding notion of good faith, requiring a greater showing by one having a background such as Giuliani vs one being a manual wage laborer.
The bottom line seems that Giuliani is not going to be cut much slack by the judicial branch, regardless of how much bellowing is raised from legislative branch persons, each with aims and motivations which may influence what is publicly said about "weaponization" of use of the judicial process from within the executive branch.
Is this judicial grant of a default judgment over discovery matters overreaching by the judicial branch, "weaponization" if you'd call it that, or is it something else? Each reader should think over such a question, to aid understanding of events as they will enfold. A fact - judges have enormous discretionary powers, the limit being on appeal other judges weigh whether sanctions fit the conduct, or not.
It is how the system operates. Anyone feeling sympathy for Rudy can feel justified for such feelings, but we are spectators of politicians' actions and the reactions they generate. We don't make the rules, and if the notion arises that the rules as made to unfairly favor the deeper pockets, Crabgrass offers no dispute. Consider who, which class, makes the rules, and then, what did you expect?
Rudy's world seems collapsing upon him, but he did go to Ukraine to try to dig up or generate dirt on Biden, (on behalf of Trump), and with such conduct can come a sense of exposure. Roger Stone, if you remember him, faced the judicial system, the weight of federal funds against his own, but he interestingly stayed loyal to Trump and coincidentally was pardoned. There are many lessons. Learning lessons ends when you croak, no sooner. Some may find excitement in that. Others may be repulsed. Some yawn, watch sports on TV, use X (formerly known as Twitter), and make it to the Reaper having voted as they did, motivated as they were, and everybody has one vote. It is in a sense a casino, bearing the name "capitalism."