Giuliani had already been found liable in the case and previously conceded in court documents that he falsely accused the women of ballot fraud. Even so, the former mayor continued to repeat his baseless allegations about the women in comments to reporters outside the Washington, D.C., courthouse this week.
What was Giuliani thinking?
Was he trying to nuance what he falsely accused the women of earlier, as compared to what he accused them of this week?
Or is there no real distinction in his mind, and he just assumes that he can say anything whenever he wants with no major consequences?
0 x
The old woodcutter spoke again. “It is impossible to talk with you. You always draw conclusions. Life is so vast, yet you judge all of life with one page or one word. You see only a fragment. Unless you know the whole story, how can you judge?"
Giuliani had already been found liable in the case and previously conceded in court documents that he falsely accused the women of ballot fraud. Even so, the former mayor continued to repeat his baseless allegations about the women in comments to reporters outside the Washington, D.C., courthouse this week.
What was Giuliani thinking?
Was he trying to nuance what he falsely accused the women of earlier, as compared to what he accused them of this week?
Or is there no real distinction in his mind, and he just assumes that he can say anything whenever he wants with no major consequences?
He was probably thinking that if he sucks up hard enough to Trump it will pay off for him somehow. Which frankly seems delusional since everyone who enters Trump's orbit seems to be diminished by the experience.
1 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Josh wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 6:19 pm
Once again, we see attempts to repress political speech and that anyone who dares challenge the “approved” narrative will have their life destroyed.
This is very very bad for democracy. I don’t know why the powers that be are choosing to do this. Doing this will gain Trump many more votes.
I disagree.
Rich and powerful people with a platform and an audience are spreading vicious lies about ordinary people - and this completely messes up the lives of the innocent victims.
Over hours of emotional testimony during the civil trial in Washington, Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss described how their lives had been completely upended after Dec. 3, 2020, when Mr. Giuliani first suggested that they had engaged in election fraud to tilt the result against Mr. Trump in Georgia, a critical swing state.
The women, who are Black and are mother and daughter, were soon flooded with expletive-laden phone calls and messages, threats and racist attacks, they testified. People said they should be hanged for treason or lynched; others told them they fantasized about hearing the sound of their necks snapping.
They showed up at Ms. Freeman’s home. They tried to execute a citizen’s arrest of Ms. Moss at her grandmother’s house. They called Ms. Moss’s 14-year-old son’s cellphone so much that it interfered with his virtual classes, and he finished his first year of high school with failing grades.
“This all started with one tweet,” Ms. Freeman told the jury, referring to a social media post from Mr. Giuliani saying, “WATCH: Video footage from Georgia shows suitcases filled with ballots pulled from under a table AFTER supervisors told poll workers to leave room and 4 people stayed behind to keep counting votes.”
2 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Giuliani had already been found liable in the case and previously conceded in court documents that he falsely accused the women of ballot fraud. Even so, the former mayor continued to repeat his baseless allegations about the women in comments to reporters outside the Washington, D.C., courthouse this week.
What was Giuliani thinking?
Was he trying to nuance what he falsely accused the women of earlier, as compared to what he accused them of this week?
Or is there no real distinction in his mind, and he just assumes that he can say anything whenever he wants with no major consequences?
He was probably thinking that if he sucks up hard enough to Trump it will pay off for him somehow. Which frankly seems delusional since everyone who enters Trump's orbit seems to be diminished by the experience.
When my family owned the upholstery company, so my brother says, my father got a "request for proposals from the Trump Org. for work at one of his many casinos in Atlantic City. There were only 5 or 6, to the best of my knowledge that could handle a really large job on the east coast. My father threw it in the trash can, because of their reputation of nonpayment to contractors. It was common knowledge, even in the 80s that he could not be counted on to pay contractors for work.
Josh wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 6:19 pm
Once again, we see attempts to repress political speech and that anyone who dares challenge the “approved” narrative will have their life destroyed.
This is very very bad for democracy. I don’t know why the powers that be are choosing to do this. Doing this will gain Trump many more votes.
I think you are confused about whose lives got destroyed here.
As well as which events in this story were bad for democracy.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Josh wrote: ↑Fri Dec 15, 2023 6:19 pm
Once again, we see attempts to repress political speech and that anyone who dares challenge the “approved” narrative will have their life destroyed.
This is very very bad for democracy. I don’t know why the powers that be are choosing to do this. Doing this will gain Trump many more votes.
I think you are confused about whose lives got destroyed here.
As well as which events in this story were bad for democracy.
Once again, free speech gets confused with people making (unsubstantiated) claims someone threatened them with violence. I don’t see the two as related.
If people commit violence that should be dealt with. It has nothing to do with political speech.
Josh wrote: ↑Sat Dec 16, 2023 9:02 am
Once again, free speech gets confused with people making (unsubstantiated) claims someone threatened them with violence. I don’t see the two as related.
If people commit violence that should be dealt with. It has nothing to do with political speech.
Defamation is speech. Politicians don't have a constitutional right to lie about everyday people and destroy their lives. Even if the death threats are not actually carried out. And it's quite possible that they would have been if they had not taken precautions.
Interesting to think about why political figures would make up lies about individual citizens, stoke up anger and outrage against them, and make it go viral on social media. They know what they are doing. What purpose does that serve for them? What kind of countries do this a lot? Do you want to live in those countries? Could they do the same to us, as Christians?
Does it make people feel safer to freely express themselves? When they do this to people who conduct elections, and were simply doing their job, following all the rules to accurately count the votes, does it protect democracy?
Last edited by Bootstrap on Sat Dec 16, 2023 10:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
When Mr. Giuliani was mayor he thrived by acting from impulse, doubling down on detractors and never apologizing, admitting error or reconsidering positions. This works as a political career for a while but public favor is fickle and eventually turns. It also has problems from a policy perspective because an effective leader needs some flexibility to respond to changing conditions. Mr. Giuliani is not skilled at this.
