and his lawsuits pending from Dominion as well as Smartmatic Ghouliani is not in a good place. While the first article indicates he’s only not involved due to a lack of legal matters to prosecute, this sounds a lot like the common precursors to Trump’s classic distancing plays.
Add to the various reports that Trump instructed his lackeys to stop paying the big G (in the Japanese manga sense), he is lacking supporters, has many, many legal liabilities, and that’s not even counting todays reports that he’s being targeted under laws previously used to target the KKK.
I don’t think anyone believes G is truly loyal to Trump (especially after not getting the pardon he sure seemed to be aiming for), and as for professional client-attorney protections, well, his Trump election lawsuits pretty much proved his professional ethics are long-dead.
So, I think it likely (not certain by a long shot) that G is in the position that the only option to avoid being bankrupt and in jail is to try (!) to make a deal for testimony. It won’t protect him from the multitudinous civil and state lawsuits, but hey, he could get lucky and make a legitimate claim for witness protection: Trumpees nationwide would certainly be ready to kill him if he testifies against their leader!
I don’t think an offer will be put on the table. Giuliani probably can’t offer any testimony that isn’t available elsewhere. The problem with convicting Trump is politics not a lack of evidence.
And my understanding is that a lawyer cannot choose to waive attorney/client privilege.
Yes. It is not the attorney’s to waive, and if the attorney were willing to commit the ethical violation, it still would not make the attorney’s testimony admissible.
It’s just the same Trump mob boss tactic that he’s used his whole life, the tactic that - IMHO - separates the legitimate business from the criminal enterprise.
His relationship to the people around him is fluid. He doesn’t have lawyers, tax consultants, financial advisors. He has “people”. Lieutenants. Body men, fixers. The same person might be his lawyer one minute, and an informal advisor the next. Especially with the lawyers who sometimes aren’t lawyers, it’s a way to play games with the law, to exert privilege after the fact, selectively.
It’s a Trump pattern, look at his relationship with Michael Cohen. Look at how loosely his White House was structured, with all those grifting fools holding the title of “Special Advisor to the President”.
Off topic, but amusing — Did you ever wonder how Trump got to have so many “special advisors”? The President doesn’t get unlimited staff, after all — there is a budget. According to Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, Melania’s former (unpaid) assistant and friend, he took most of the money allocated for the First Lady’s staff and transferred it over to his office, allowing him to pay top dollar to cronies like Steve Bannon and KellyAnne Conway, but leaving his wife with a skeleton staff.
Well, other people that defeat confidentiality. It depends on who the other person(s) is/are and why they are there. If they are there to further the cause, and the communication was still intended to be confidential, then it probably stays confidential.
Yeah, but sometimes he doesn’t have other people around, or he claims the other people were also attorneys or parties to the action. Or he flaps his gums and claims privilege even though he isn’t legally entitled to it, which sets the stage for his claims of persecution.
He’s pulled this shit with Guiliani before, and also with Michael Cohen. Sometimes it works to his advantage if the other guy in the room isn’t his lawyer.
Sidenote to the thread - who would be interested in bailing G out? A book deal would possibly be good, but so toxic it might be risky. I don’t think he has the charm to pull in a major fundraiser, and I don’t think the R establishment has any desire to assist.