(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.