“They are suing me in order to lie to them. I’m sorry, I can’t do it,” he said.

Rudy Giuliani doubled down on his election-related allegations Monday, just days after two Georgia election workers won millions in a defamation lawsuit against him and hours after they filed another suit against him.

The former New York mayor must pay $148 million in damages to election workers Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss as a result of their emotional distress following Giuliani’s accusations that the two were manipulating ballots in 2020. The second lawsuit sought to keep him from repeating the debunked claims at the heart of the first case.

In a rambling interview with Newsmax’s Rob Schmitt, Giuliani blasted the verdict, describing the court as a “fascist system run by the Biden regime.”

Giuliani told Schmitt that he still believes the allegations to be true, but that they “want me to lie.”

  • squiblet
    link
    fedilink
    171 year ago

    But he claims it totally exonerates him, in which case they would not even bring a criminal trial.

    • @jordanlund
      link
      -61 year ago

      Oh, it’s coming regardless of the evidence.

      • squiblet
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Obviously we all know here that Giuliani has no ‘evidence’, but if he did and they brought a criminal case, so what? It would get tossed out.

        • @jordanlund
          link
          01 year ago

          They already brought the criminal case and that’s not the way criminal cases work. The evidence still has to be presented at trial and would need to be cross examined.

          So by releasing that information early, in a civil case, they would be giving the prosecution the advantage of extra time to poke holes in their defense.

          You don’t just present evidence in a criminal case and get to go home, trials don’t work like that.

          • squiblet
            link
            fedilink
            81 year ago

            Giuliani claims it’s bulletproof, completely exonerating evidence. So they couldn’t poke holes in it. If such evidence was made public, the prosecution would back down rather than run a hopeless case against him. Of course, we know that he has nothing, as noted.

            • @jordanlund
              link
              01 year ago

              No prosecution backs down like that, again, trials don’t work that way.

              • squiblet
                link
                fedilink
                2
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                If they have already initiated the case, Sure. They’d evaluate the evidence in court. If they hadn’t, no, they could decide to not bring charges if it seemed like it would be a waste of time and/or they’d be censured for a frivolous case.

                • @jordanlund
                  link
                  01 year ago

                  We’re talking about the Georgia election interference, so yes, the criminal case is already initiated. :)

                  • squiblet
                    link
                    fedilink
                    21 year ago

                    We’re also talking about some purely hypothetical world where Giuliani has ‘evidence’.