politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Alright this is just too juicy to ignore.
In civil litigation, the plaintiff will often seek discovery of the defendant's finances, insurance policies, etc to find out if the defendant will ultimately be able to pay a judgement. Looks like Guliani is trying to avoid that because he's embarrassed he's broke:
The article also cited campaign disclosures showing Trump's PAC was paying Guliani's bills related to record storage and production, at a cost of $300k. But it sounds like Trump cut him off:
What is fun is if he doesn't produce documents he may ultimately get sanctioned with negative inferences (instruction to the jury that they should assume anything Guliani didn't turn over was basically a smoking gun against him) or a default judgement as to liability (see Alex Jones). He's fucked lol. Damn I am never not fascinated by the epic fall of Guliani.
Your last comment might be the most salient
I believe I recall that he ran away to avoid being served his court docs.
Def not a pattern of behavior. You can trust him. /s
Is there precedent for this? It's not like he's refusing to turn over records, he's just unable to due to financial hardships (allegedly, he could be lying I guess). If it were anybody else, that would be an incredibly fucked up thing for the courts to do to somebody.
Your right, it's usually when the defendant is engaging in bad faith, like purposely hiding documents. The case I remember, defendant intentionally refused to turn over a bad document and might even have destroyed it, but one of the law clerks at defendant's firm decided to be a whistleblower. I don't know if there's specific precedent for this if the grounds are just I'm to broke to conduct a search, but it's possible. It's usually a last resort, the judge will just keep issueing fines and attorneys fees for a few months. But at some point the case needs to move forward in the interst of justice, and the judge is going to have to figure out a way to do that if Guliani won't turn over the documents needed for the case. I doubt the "I'm too broke" excuse is going to hold up forever.