(Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
The question is: Why should the court abstain from exercising its “inherent authority for an order holding Defendant Rudolph W. Giuliani in civil contempt and imposing sanctions” for failing to comply with discovery in the collection action filed by Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss?
And the answer is Hunter Biden.
This Court should know that one or more of Plaintiffs’ counsels was partners with Hunter Biden as Boies Schiller Flexner LLC, President Joseph Biden’s son, and had been involved with, upon information and belief, Burisma Holdings and/or Ukrainian issues. These issues became very, very political and charged during the 2020 Presidential Campaign and thereafter. One or more of the organizations of the Plaintiffs’ counsels are politically based organizations, such as the organization United to Protect Democracy, whose website states” “Protect Democracy is a… group dedicated to defeating the authoritarian threat… and protecting liberal democracy. Our experts and advocates use litigation, …. to stand up for… the rule of law…. and a better democracy for future generations”. No matter what anyone says, the truth and fact is that Plaintiffs are represented by those who believe in liberal democracy, and you have a defendant whose beliefs are the antithesis of the Plaintiffs’ counsel.
The answer is that Judge Lewis Liman got more Democratic votes to confirm him in 2018 than Republicans:
This Court should try to avoid the politics involved in this case. When the Honorable Judge of this Court was nominated for the current District Judge position, no Democratic Senators voted against the nomination of the Honor Judge, but twenty nine (29) Republican Senators voted against the Honorable Judge. Hopefully, the Honor Judge will be able to be unbiased against Defendant. However, even subconsciously, a human being can have a political bias and the rapid rocket docket approach by this Court and entertaining so many of Plaintiffs’ motions and letters from the Plaintiffs’ counsel and ruling against the Defendant nearly 100% of the time is troubling.
Also, Judge Liman’s father Arthur Liman represented clients being prosecuted by the Southern District of New York, when Rudy was the US Attorney for that office:
It is Defendant’s recent understanding that the Honorable Judge is the son of the late Arthur L. Liman, who it has been discovered passed away at a time when Defendant Rudolph Giuliani was the prosecutor as the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and the late Arthur L. Liman was representing certain defendants in Drexel Lambert prosecution cases (Michael Milken, Ivan Boesky, Dennis Levine). Defendant hopes that Defendant is afforded every right under the law by this Court in light of the knowledge that the Defendant before this Court is the person who was prosecuting the Honorable Judge’s late father Arthur L. Liman clients when or around the time that the Honorable Judge’s late father Arthur L. Liman passed away.
[Note: Arthur Liman, the renowned public interest lawyer who served as chief counsel for the Senate investigation of the Iran–Contra affair, died in 1997. Giuliani left SDNY in 1989.]
The answer is, you can’t hold Rudy in contempt because Willkie Farr & Gallagher is just representing the women he defamed to get good publicity for the firm:
This Court should see that Willkie Farr & Gallagher, allegedly working “pro bono” is publicizing this case and all cases involving Defendant Rudolph Giuliani, which likely will or has generated probably millions of dollars for Willkie Farr & Gallagher from other clients who dislike Defendant Rudolph Giuliani and/or President Trump. Pro bono attorneys would not spend thousands of hours on a pro bono assignment without an ulterior motive – a profit motive.
Plus Willkie Farr is worried about bad publicity because Donald Trump will be president in January, and Rudy is Trump’s favorite pro bono lawyer:
This Court has fast-tracked this case and it is perplexing why this rapid rocket docket approach has been utilized, but the fact is that the Plaintiffs want this case over by January 20, 2025 when President Trump takes office, because it’s not in Willkie Farr & Gallagher’s best interests to have this case proceeding once there is a new administration in Washington, as clients of Willkie Farr & Gallagher who would have to work with the new administration in Washington may be offended by the approaches taken by Willkie Farr & Gallagher with their manner of overly aggressive discovery tactics, designed to win, not on the merits, but on default or sanctions, because they cannot win based on the facts.
Did we mention Hunter Biden?
Plaintiffs and their counsel are seeking to take every asset of the Defendant before there is a change in administration from President Biden to President Trump. The fact is that this case evolved from the 2020 election, where Defendant worked for President Trump and while the Plaintiffs’ counsel was to believed to have supported President Biden; this is what this fierce prosecution of this case derives from. Defendant was very outspoken against Hunter Biden and the Hunter Biden laptop which many people said was Russian disinformation, when the truth eventually came out that the Hunter Biden laptop was authentic and real. At least one of Plaintiffs’ counsel has emails in the public domain with Hunter Biden on the same emails, and such counsel was Special Assistant to President Barak Obama and Associate White House Counsel . The fact is that this case is not really about the judgment that the Plaintiffs obtained in a ghastly sum, among the largest judgment ever against an individual for defamation in the United States. This is a battle between the left and the right and this is one of the last battles that exist from the 2020 election.
Rudy should not be sanctioned because it’s his old lawyers’ fault he missed every discovery deadline. Now that he has Joe Cammarata, divorce lawyer to the stars (of Staten Island), on the case, it’s all going much better:
It appears that Plaintiffs’ counsel made it very difficult for Defendant’s prior counsel, Kenneth Caruso, Esq. and David Labkowski, Esq. with motions and filings consistently done until Kenneth Caruso, Esq. and David Labkowski, Esq. could not take it anymore, and they had to withdraw as Defendant’s counsel. They still represent the Defendant on the appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Defendant’s counsel has experienced the voluminous filings by Plaintiffs’ counsel and knows that it is like a war with a dozen machine guns shooting at you, and only one person to defend it. It is respectfully requested that this Court take a step back and realize that this is what is happening. Defendant has substantially complied with court orders and discovery since Defendant’s present counsel began to take over the representation on November 26, 2024. Defendant was not the person responsible for the Plaintiffs not receiving discovery prior to November 26, 2024, and he should not face any sanctions or penalties of any kind.
The answer is that Rudy should not be sanctioned because you gotta stick up for the little guy, a former mayor and US Attorney, when he is being bullied by two civil servants whose lives he ruined by going on a media tour to accuse them of stealing an election:
The Honorable Judge once said that “The quality of our system of justice is measured by the service it provides to the poorest and most despised members of society”. There are many individuals who were against President Trump and as such, against Rudolph Giuliani, and many members of society despise Defendant Rudolph Giuliani and President Trump, however, the quality of our system of justice is measured by the service it provides to defendants like Defendant Rudolph Giuliani, who the Plaintiffs and their counsel apparently likely despise.
And finally, Rudy should not be sanctioned in this case where he is trying to establish Florida residency because the court in DC refused to waive bond, allowing Freeman and Moss to go to collections. And Rudy can’t pay the bond, as evidenced by the attached bankruptcy filing from the Southern District of New York where he said his assets were less than $10 million and listed his residency as New York:
The fact is that the supersedeas bond would have had to be in an amount in excess of $145 million, and as stated in the bankruptcy petition filed by Defendant, his assets totaled between $1 million and $10 million (Exhibit “1”). There was no possibly way for Defendant to have obtained any bond due to the value of the judgment, which on appeal it is anticipated will be reversed or the judgment amount will be greatly reduced.
The contempt hearing is scheduled for January 3. But in the meantime, what with Cammarata and Giuliani (in his supporting declaration) making public representations about why his former lawyers peaced out, Judge Liman has sua sponte given them until tomorrow to explain why he shouldn’t unseal the documents saying exactly why prior counsel said they could not ethically continue to represent Rudy.
Freeman v. Giuliani [Docket via Court Listener]
Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she produces the Law and Chaos substack and podcast.