we conclude that there is uncontroverted evidence that respondent communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump’s failed effort at reelection in 2020. These false statements were made to improperly bolster respondent’s narrative that due to widespread voter fraud, victory in the 2020 United States presidential election was stolen from his client. We conclude that respondent’s conduct immediately threatens the public interest and warrants interim suspension from the practice of law, pending further proceedings before the Attorney Grievance Committee
to the naysayers that “oaths” are pointless - like all Attorneys Mr Giuliani took an oath as “an officer of the Court” —he is bound by the Professional Rules of Conduct (canons) and his unrepentant lies, misleading and out right falsities of the 2020 election — cost him (for the interim) his bar license during the pendency of Attorney Grievance Committee matter into his conduct
On one hand you kind of have to give Giuliani a hat tip because the “knowing or knowingly” are governed by Rules 3.3 and 4.1 - but as the panel made clear - no such application applies to “Rule 8.4 (c), however, contains no such express element”…
But the panel opted to require the “know, known, knowing” element as a standard in this matter it actually pretty smart because it preemptively inoculates any future counter-argument (particularly if Giuliani appeals)
At any rate I have to get back to my J-O-B and the Memo/Opinion can be found here - again and not to belabor this - Giuliani suspension is an interim suspension during the pendency of this matter - it is not a permanent suspension -so if certain people on Twitter are saying as much point then to page 2 because the narrative Giuliani has been permanently suspended is NOT at all accurate. -Filey
It will be interesting to see how this all unfolds and hopefully will help American’s understand how close we came to losing it all. Thank the Lord that our branches of government are working ♥️⚖️🇺🇸
His “ Conclusory or vague arguments will not create a controverted issue as to whether there has been misconduct…” the panel was having none of it and I legit LLOLs when they cited that he failed to proffer affidavits <—dead just dead laughing
Correct -during the pendency and review of the “Attorney Grievance Committee“ he is not allowed to practice law. And I wish others were as astute as you because the narrative he’s been permanently suspended is not at all accurate and that’s why I highlighted and linked to the Memo.
Same - I think he should also face a sanctions hearing in every Federal District Court where he made false statements and/or intentionally mislead the Court - Like in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia etc
Rudy’s suspension is a good start. Sydney Powell and Lin Wood suspension would be the icing on the cake!!!
Motion seconded?!?
Ha. About fuckin' time.
This does not make me sadz
Watching his dipshit son stand in a parking lot faux incensed pearl clutching raging was too funny. I thought it was Danny Bonaduce at first. LOL
BAAAAAHHHAAAHHHAAAA but who’s going to tell him the 1st judicial isn’t part of the Department of Justice?
It will be interesting to see how this all unfolds and hopefully will help American’s understand how close we came to losing it all. Thank the Lord that our branches of government are working ♥️⚖️🇺🇸
Love it.
I hope Michigan takes note. Requests for sanctions of Powell, Wood and others in the KRACKEN case (King v Whitmer).
Lies have consequences
May this lead to permanent disbarment. Meanwhile, he can continue to shuck crappy pillows.
His “ Conclusory or vague arguments will not create a controverted issue as to whether there has been misconduct…” the panel was having none of it and I legit LLOLs when they cited that he failed to proffer affidavits <—dead just dead laughing
Years of corrupt lawyering must have made him forgetful of actual legal procedure lololol.
Q:
Am I correct that an interim suspension from practicing law is very different from some of the folks leaping to saying he has been disbarred?
But I will agree with Natalie's comment, "About fuckin' time".
Correct -during the pendency and review of the “Attorney Grievance Committee“ he is not allowed to practice law. And I wish others were as astute as you because the narrative he’s been permanently suspended is not at all accurate and that’s why I highlighted and linked to the Memo.
It’s about time!
Just a really good day all around, wasn’t it?
"More, more, more
How do you like it? How do you like it?"
How do you like your crow!!!! lol
Preferably with the saltiest tears of my enemies 😂🤣😂
Too bad
So sad 😂
I'm so surprised they didn't make it permanent considering his non-compliance.
Agreed but I think that’s probably the end goal - the grievance board has to follow their rules and procedures.
I think I'm shocked it actually happened.
Same - I think he should also face a sanctions hearing in every Federal District Court where he made false statements and/or intentionally mislead the Court - Like in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia etc