Giulaini Search Warrant Question

Any idea what crimes might have been committed by Individual Number 1 that Giuliani might be privy to or involved with? I assume most of the ongoing investigations of DJT are about his business practices and/or his tax “avoidance” strategies, which presumably Rudy didn’t have a lot to do with.

Wild speculation. Media reports clearly link this warrant to a criminal investigation into unregistered lobbying by Mr. Giuliani himself on behalf of Ukranians.


@Fotheringay-Phipps has a good take. Prosecutors also likely have volumes of information about him from other persons being investigated so even if he, let’s say, deleted some emails, all the recipients still have them, not to mention the email providers who likely have backups. .

More likely, he is assuming that because he is a lawyer, prosecutors would give him some deference so as not to be accused of violating attorney-client privilege. As with Michael Cohen though, there is the potential that his claims of attorney-client privilege will be deemed specious.

This too.

I have never heard of feds getting a wire tap order with the knowledge of the user.

Giuliani was a good prosecutor but I’m not aware of any of his particular prosecutorial innovations other than, apparently, the “perp walk.” He hasn’t been arrested so that hasn’t been used against him. I’m not sure what else you are talking about here.

That’s kinda’ what I meant by being protected by “the system”. Perhaps a poor choice of words on my part.

Giuliani was among the first (he has falsely claimed the first) official in the Justice Department to recognize the power of the RICO statute that had gone unused for more than a decade after its enactment. Basically, building a case by presenting evidence (like informants) to a court to secure warrants (like tapping) and using the fruits of those warrants to secure more warrants (like search), building a ladder to to an indictment that might be years down the road.

According to one of the talking heads I was just listening to, the fact that content existed and was deleted can infer (if not prove) criminal intent. I imagine this would especially be the case if said content could be obtained elsewhere, such as a recipient or provider.


For those who are interested, here’s NY State’s law on the matter:

In part …

When a person or company withholds, alters, hides, or destroys evidence relevant to the litigation, either intentionally or negligently, it is considered “spoliation” of evidence and can lead to sanctions against the party that is guilty of spoliation including, but not limited to, dismissal of the action, striking a pleading, assessing monetary penalties, or permitting the jury to take a negative inference against the spoliating party. The negative inference at trial can be very damaging to a party because it permits the jury to infer that there was something to hide (e.g., the party had a “guilty conscience”) and the missing evidence is unavailable because it negatively impacted that party’s affirmative case or defense.

And it’s amazing how hard it is to completely delete something from a device and not leave some trace (or a complete copy) somewhere in its guts or in the cloud. Or have I just been watching too many Scandinavian cop shows?

Oh, I think if you just set up a podium at a landscaping company and got him rambling in front of a crowd with MAGA signs, he’d lose track and say all the things he shouldn’t in the first half hour…

We can’t ever forget how utterly bizarre he was in the latter days of the Trumpian empire. Giuliani isn’t stupid, but he’s also not rational–and any prediction of his behavior that’s predicated on what would be done by someone in full possession of their faculties is a flawed prediction.

Nor have I. I was just trying to answer the question about whether they could tap a phone without a court order. No, the feds can’t do that. But (and perhaps this is self evident) getting a court order doesn’t mean anybody being investigated is aware of the phone tap.

From what I understand, Rudy is quite the active drunk (there’s a story somewhere about a midday interview, where he’s slurping Bloody Marys with his fly unzipped). I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s also got some sort of cash flow issues, as he’s probably had a few glimpses of the high life and may be trying to continue the opulence. This is all conjecture by me, but those traits might explain his descent into criminal behavior.

“Vaguely orange-hued”? Individual 1 has a stronger orange hue than a Satsuma tangerine. :smiley:

He’s an Orange Gruffy.

That’s really an excellent reminder that – what with it being 2021 and all – I can turn the color saturation on all my TVs back to their pre-2017 levels :wink:

Just a quick reminder on the history of secret wiretaps in modern times,


He was once.

Lin Wood and Sidney Powell were once lawyers with good reputations, too.

There are programs designed to completely obliterate any trace of a certain file. But the average computer user is fairly unlikely to know that such programs exist.

As far as I know, these programs are limited to local storage (your own devices). Think about text message contents - you can delete it off your phone but the recipient has their own copy and the SMS provider might keep a copy of the message content for anywhere from a few hours to three months. And if you have your old phone in some drawer, copies of all of your old messages might still be on it.


I’d be surprised if Rudy knows the Recycle Bin exists.

As a Republican, he refused to recycle just to own the libs.