<strike>I’m torn on this one, the best link I can find for this story (right now) is from a Fox afilliate and ordinarily I would’t want to feed Fox clicks, but it is what is, the best link is the best link.</strike>
Found a non-Fox source.
The other link is a “click it and watch the video” which I think is more annoying than linking to Fox.
Okay, now a comment on the article and Guiliani's statement.
Guiliani entered into a proffer agreement with Jack Smith's investigation in Florida. Proffers are agreements where a person is interviewed by the investigation, with the benefit of not having any of their statements in that conversation - or additional information which is only reached because of statements in that conversation - used against them in court. Unless it is found that they were lying in the interview, then everything is off the table. Guiliani had such an interview before the Jan 6 charges were issued by Jack Smith in the DC Circuit. Guiliani is an unindicted co-conspirator in that indictment.
Proffers are usually the first step towards greater cooperation with the investigation, normally followed by a plea agreement conditional on cooperation, possibly up to full prosecutorial immunity.
But now this statement from Guiliani, which is clearly just doubling down on lunacy, is in clear opposition to any kind of previous cooperation with investigations. I have to think that if Guiliani was cooperating with Jack Smith's prosecution, he isn't now, but I don't know when or why that change happened.
I find this statement hilarious when he already admitted, in a court filing in a different case, that yes, he defamed election workers by lying about them.
Nice article, even though his statement is exactly what we all expected him to say.
Also, if you ever don't want to give a news site clicks (or want to get around the paywall), you can just copy the article contents into the body of the post or a comment. I do that for the WaPo articles I post.
Add comment