zum Originalbeitrag

Rudi Giuliani, Trumps Speerspitze im juristischen Kampf um die Wahlkampf-Wende, blamiert sich in seinem erstem Gerichtsauftritt seit 30 Jahren durch Unwissenheit und Spleenigkeit.

Die auf juristische Nachrichten spezialisierte Internetseite "Law & Crime" berichtet, schon in seiner "Eröffnungstirade" habe Giuliani Wahlbetrugsvorwürfe erhoben, die "eher für den rechtsgerichteten Äther geeignet schienen als für einen Bundesgerichtssaal". Unter anderem hat der Anwalt auf die Frage des Richters, welche Prüfungsnorm (standard of scrutiny) bei der Untersuchung des Vorgehens der Regierung von Pennsylvania angewandt werden sollte, entgegnet: "die normale." Die Antwort löste "Law & Crime" zufolge weit verbreiteten Spott unter Juristen aus, da sie offengelegt habe, dass Giuliani nicht mit den drei unterschiedlich strengen Untersuchungsstandards an US-Gerichten – "rational basis review", "intermediate scrutiny" und "strict scrutiny" – vertraut sei. Giuliani räumte demnach später in der Anhörung sogar ein, dass er nicht wisse, was "strict scrutiny" bedeute.

San Francisco Chronicle: "I forgot his name": A rusty Giuliani returns to the courtroom on Trump\'s behalf

WILLIAMSPORT, Pa. (AP) — Rudy Giuliani, representing a client inside a courtroom for the first time in nearly three decades, showed some rust as he tried to make the case that President Donald Trump has been robbed of reelection.
...
Over the next several hours, he fiddled with his Twitter account, forgot which judge he was talking to and threw around unsupported accusations about a nationwide conspiracy by Democrats to steal the election.
...
Nevertheless, Giuliani plowed ahead Tuesday, needling an opposing lawyer by calling him “the man who was very angry with me, I forgot his name.”
He mistook the judge for a federal judge in a separate Pennsylvania district who rejected a separate Trump campaign case: “I was accused of not reading your opinion and that I did not understand it.”
And he tripped himself up over the meaning of “opacity.”
“In the plaintiffs’ counties, they were denied the opportunity to have an unobstructed observation and ensure opacity,” Giuliani said. “I’m not quite sure I know what opacity means. It probably means you can see, right?”
“It means you can’t,” said U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann.
“Big words, your honor,” Giuliani said.
Giuliani acknowledged in court that a portion of the lawsuit had been “mistakenly” removed and, under questioning by Brann, that the lawsuit did not actually allege election fraud, despite his claims about it.
At times, Giuliani struggled to answer Brann's questions, or the Philadelphia lawyer working alongside Giuliani, Linda Kerns, took over in answering.


Und noch während er vor dem Richter gestanden habe, habe der 76-Jährige den Tweet eines anderen Trump-Anwalts geteilt, der sein Eröffnungsstatement als "ausgezeichnet" bezeichnet hatte, ungeachtet der Tatsache, dass die darin hauptsächlich vorgebrachten Anwürfe had been “mistakenly” removed.

  

Beitrag dem Admin melden | Urheberrechtsverletzung melden

Thema #3624
 Erstes Thema | Letztes Thema


Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.27
Copyright 1997-2003 DCScripts.com
0.07