“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@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months 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@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months 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@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months 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.

          • squiblet@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months 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@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

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

              • squiblet@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

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