Giuliani’s avalanche of bullshit
by digby
Giuliani is a batshit crazy liar and his avalanche of bullshit ends up exhausting Tapper who gamely tries to keep up with it and sadly fails through no fault of his own. Dealing with a lunatic with logic is very difficult.
If you can’t watch the above, here is the transcript. I’m copying it because I think there needs to be a record of this lunacy. For a team that’s been totally exonerated, they sure are trying to discredit it.
TAPPER: Thank you so much for being here. You said on Thursday that the rebuttal to the Mueller report is — quote — “ready to go” and you expect to release it after the weekend. Your colleague Jay Sekulow said he doesn’t expect that you will need to put out a rebuttal at all. Clear this up for us. Are you going to release a rebuttal?
GIULIANI: Well, we were ready — we were ready to go if we thought that a lot of the issues were left open, too open. Right now, they seem to be OK. But we’re ready to put it out when we have to.
TAPPER: But you’re not necessarily going to put it out?
GIULIANI: I think the odds are it’ll get out at some point. For example, you have testimony coming up. I know that the attorney general’s going to testify. I know that Mueller is going to testify. I assume people like McGahn will testify. I’m not sure. But there will be a point at which we will put it out. And then I think…
TAPPER: But not tomorrow?
GIULIANI: Not tomorrow, not the next day. Then we will see. We will see what happens.
TAPPER: I want to start off also by saying, you know, congratulations. The Mueller report concluded that there is insufficient evidence that the president or anybody on his team conspired criminally with the Russians. That’s — that’s good news. But I guess I’m confused as to the president and you both embracing that part of the Mueller report, and then calling, in the president’s words, B.S. the rest of — the rest of the report.
(LAUGHTER)
TAPPER: And I’m — he didn’t actually say B.S. He used the actual word.
GIULIANI: Well, B.S. not quite a legal term, but it’s a term that most people understand.
TAPPER: Right. But how can you criticize and embrace at the same time?
GIULIANI: Well, here’s the difference, because, first of all, overview, this is a prosecutor’s document, 400 pages, a prosecutor’s view, and then a prosecutor which I think people would grant had a lot of people that were somewhat biased against the president.
TAPPER: I don’t know that everybody would grant that, but, OK, that’s your opinion.
GIULIANI: Well, I mean, if you — well, if you have somebody there who’s a key prosecutor who was chief counsel to the Clinton Foundation, my goodness, I mean, that isn’t much of a stretch. But, in any event, a lot of things are left out. A lot of things are false. I shouldn’t say a lot of things. Some things are false. A lot of things are questionable.
TAPPER: What’s false?
GIULIANI: Well, a lot of what Cohen — they recite what Cohen said as if it’s the truth. Cohen is incapable of telling the truth.
TAPPER: But what specifically is in the report…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: … tell you what specifically in the report, that Cohen that — that we dangled a pardon in front of Cohen. We did not dangle a pardon in front of Cohen. And his lawyer, his lawyer is willing to testify that we didn’t. They didn’t bother — they didn’t bother to include that in the report, which is clear refutation of what he said, nor do they list all the things that go to Cohen’s credibility that would cast a doubt on everything he’s saying.
It was not a fair report. It wasn’t like the normal prosecutor. When you find that a person didn’t commit the crime, you then go look at the hypothesis of, how did it come about, how did it start? No examination of, how could the FBI has started an investigation of a presidential candidate based on those 10 words that were said to Papadopoulos? Don’t indicate any involvement by the candidate. Normally, what the FBI would do is warn the candidate, like they did with Feinstein when she had a communist spy on her staff. No — no delving into that.
It’s clear that they tried very, very hard to create a case that the president was involved in Russian whatever. Couldn’t do it. They tried 100 different ways. They put Manafort in jail. They put him in solitary confinement.
TAPPER: Right.
GIULIANI: They questioned him 13 times. He wouldn’t give them the information 13 times. They tried to crack people. There’s no question they prosecuted Flynn, not because Flynn did anything wrong. They created what Flynn did wrong.
TAPPER: So — but this was an investigation…
GIULIANI: And then they prosecuted him to crack him.
TAPPER: This is an investigation into Russian election interference, right, Russian attempted interference in the election.
GIULIANI: Well…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: I have no…
TAPPER: And there are Russians that have been indicted.
GIULIANI: I have no problem with investigating Russian interference in an election.
TAPPER: But there are Russians who were indicted.
GIULIANI: But that’s not the reason this was a big story. This was a big story because they said that the man who got elected president of the United States was conspiring with the Russians in that interference, which is close to treason. Man, that’s what made it a national, international story. You know, Russians have been interfering…
TAPPER: There are people on the campaign who were talking to Russians, right?
GIULIANI: Russians — yes. And there were people on Hillary’s campaign that were talking to Ukrainians. I mean, the reality is, you think this is the first time the Russians have interfered in an American election?
TAPPER: No, it’s definitely not. But let me ask you a question, because Mitt Romney put out a statement saying that he was — quote — “appalled” that, among other things, “fellow citizens working in a campaign for president welcomed help from Russia, including information that had been illegally obtained, that none of them acted to inform American law enforcement.”
Again, it’s — again, it’s good news that there is insufficient evidence, but what about the willingness…
GIULIANI: Man — man, if I could tell you the things he wanted to do.
TAPPER: That Rudy Giuliani — that Mitt Romney wanted to do?
GIULIANI: No, that that guy wanted to do. Come on.
TAPPER: What do you mean the things that Mitt Romney…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: Stop the bull. Stop the bull. Stop this pious act that you weren’t digging up, trying to dig up dirt on people, putting dirt out on people.
TAPPER: Who, Mitt Romney?
GIULIANI: When he was running for president. He — I ran against him.
TAPPER: Right.
GIULIANI: So did John McCain run against him.
TAPPER: But he wasn’t accepting information from foreign…
GIULIANI: I don’t know if he was accepting information from foreign — who says that the president accepted information from foreigners? You mean people on his campaign might have done it? First of all…
TAPPER: But the Trump Tower meeting, I think, is what he was referring to, the willingness to sit down with Russians offering dirt on Hillary Clinton. That is what Mitt Romney seems to be talking about.
GIULIANI: What a hypocrite. What a hypocrite.
TAPPER: But why is that hypocritical?
GIULIANI: Any candidate — any candidate in the whole world in America would take information, negative…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: From a foreign source, from a hostile foreign source?
GIULIANI: Who says it’s even illegal? Who says it’s even illegal? And then does the information turn out to be false, by the way?
The information that was gleaned and disseminated, every newspaper printed it. Why did “The Washington Post” print the information that came from a foreign source, when they knew it was hacked? Aren’t they just as wrong for doing that as the campaign wanting to use it? The information…(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: But why do think Mitt Romney is a hypocrite if he is saying…
GIULIANI: Because Mitt Romney did things very similar to that.
TAPPER: Taking information from Russians?
GIULIANI: No, no. There’s nothing — there’s nothing wrong with taking information from Russians.
TAPPER: There’s nothing wrong with taking information…
GIULIANI: It depends on where it came from. It depends on where it came from. You’re assuming that the giving of information is a campaign contribution. Read the report carefully.
TAPPER: Mm-hmm.
GIULIANI: The report says, we can’t conclude that, because the law is pretty much against that.
Do you think — people get information from this person, that person, this person.
TAPPER: So you would — you would have accepted information from Russians against a client — against a candidate if you were running in the presidential election?
GIULIANI: I probably — I probably wouldn’t. I wasn’t asked. I would advised, just out of excess of caution, don’t do it.
I will give you another thing, though.
TAPPER: But you’re saying — but you’re saying there is nothing wrong with doing that. You — I mean, that…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: There’s no — there’s no crime.
TAPPER: I’m not talking about crime. I’m talking about ethics…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: We’re going to get into morality?
TAPPER: Yes.
GIULIANI: That isn’t what prosecutors look at, morality.
TAPPER: No, but that’s what Mitt Romney — but that’s what Mitt Romney is referring to.
GIULIANI: But this didn’t become an international scandal because of immorality. It became an international scandal because the president was accused of violating the law, falsely, and now nobody wants to try to figure out who did it, because that’s the real wrongdoing here. And the reality is…
TAPPER: But you don’t think this is immoral or unethical to take…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: Well, suppose I do.
TAPPER: Yes.
GIULIANI: I’m going to prosecute people for immoral… (CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: I’m not talking about the prosecution part of this.
GIULIANI: I’m going to go look at every — I’d like to take a good look at Romney’s campaign and see if there were any immoral or unethical things done by the people working for him that he didn’t know about. If there weren’t, then it was the only campaign in history, because he’s maybe is holier than the holiest one. There’s no campaign in history that hasn’t done that.
TAPPER: But do you think — you think that there shouldn’t be a high standard for the president of the United States, that he not…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: You are mixing up two things.
TAPPER: Ethics and law is what I’m…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: Number one.
TAPPER: Yes.
GIULIANI: Number one. Number two, you’re mixing up what happened at this level of campaign and what the candidate knows about.
Donald Trump…
TAPPER: Well, I mean, this level was the campaign chairman, the president’s son and the president’s son-in-law.
GIULIANI: But it wasn’t the president. It was not the president.
TAPPER: But that’s not a low level. That’s a high level, a campaign chairman and his son and son-in-law.
GIULIANI: But the — well, OK, people other than the candidate.
TAPPER: Right.
GIULIANI: People other than the candidate. The question is, did Donald Trump — let’s call that collude — colluded with the Russians? The answer is, he didn’t collude with them, he didn’t conspire with them, he didn’t coordinate with them.
And all of that that was run against him — wait now..
TAPPER: Yes.
GIULIANI: All of that that was run against him, two FBI investigations, has found out to be false. And now that it’s over…
TAPPER: Well, insufficient evidence.
GIULIANI: And now…
TAPPER: Insufficient evidence.
GIULIANI: Well, no, not on collusion.
TAPPER: Right, they said they could not find criminal — they could not find sufficient evidence of criminal conspiracy.
GIULIANI: They couldn’t find a single piece evidence for anything, hacking, dissemination.
TAPPER: There’s an entire volume of evidence.
GIULIANI: Yes.
TAPPER: It just doesn’t rise to criminality.
GIULIANI: There is an entire volume of stuff, of stuff, not of evidence.
TAPPER: Well, you can call it stuff, but Mitt Romney obviously find it offensive…
GIULIANI: Well…
TAPPER: … that fellow citizens working on a campaign welcomed help from Russia.
GIULIANI: But you’re quoting Mitt Romney like he’s an unbiased source. This man has a whole history of awful things said about Donald Trump, including he’s morally unfit to be president, before he ever knew anything about…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: But you — you just said you wouldn’t accept help from the Russians if you were a candidate.
GIULIANI: I don’t know if I would or I wouldn’t. I — the legal advice I would give is, out of an excess of caution, don’t do it. But maybe that’s informed somewhat by what is going on right now and what we have learned since then. The reality is, you’re picking on a minor point, when the major point is, he was pursued for years for a false charge, two FBI investigations, one with four affidavits for electronic surveillance that turn out to be fraudulent. That’s a big crime.
Now…
TAPPER: Yes. GIULIANI: … it turns out he didn’t do it. Isn’t anybody in the media interested in, how did this happen? Is this just an accident?
TAPPER: Well, the investigation into the president, how did it happen?
GIULIANI: Yes. Yes. You tell me how.
TAPPER: We know.
GIULIANI: No, you don’t know.
TAPPER: The volume that is out…
GIULIANI: You never investigated.
TAPPER: … is the detail of how and why it’s — but let me — I want to…
GIULIANI: No, no, no, they didn’t.
TAPPER: It started with George Papadopoulos and somebody approaching him.
GIULIANI: You would never — you never would have started an investigation of a major party candidate, of the candidate, based on the…
TAPPER: But the…
GIULIANI: Wait.
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: Based on one…
TAPPER: But the DNC was hacked. And John Podesta was spear-phished, and all these e-mails were illegally…
GIULIANI: But those two things are disconnected.
TAPPER: They’re not disconnected.
GIULIANI: Trump had nothing to do with that. No. It said…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: They’re not disconnected. They were — that’s what they were investigating, Russian election…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: Yes, you’re fighting it. You’re fighting it so hard.
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: No, I’m just pointing out the facts in the report.
GIULIANI: But there’s a prejudice, I got to tell you. It’s just assumed that anything about him, we’re going to magnify it, and anything about the other side, we don’t look at. The whole situation with Papadopoulos, to a trained investigator, is extremely, unbelievably suspicious. The man is given one little piece of information. The Russians…
TAPPER: The Russians have Hillary Clinton’s e-mails.
GIULIANI: … by a Maltese counterintelligence guy.
TAPPER: OK, by Mifsud, yes.
GIULIANI: Mifsud. And then he repeats it a month later to an Australian guy with a very shady background, big contributor to Hillary Clinton, even though he’s an Australian.
TAPPER: He isn’t a contributor to Hillary Clinton. He’s an Australian. You can’t contribute….
GIULIANI: No, no, he’s a — I think he’s a citizen now. Not illegal. He raised money for him, helped to get money — oh, for the foundation. I’m sorry.
TAPPER: To the Clinton Foundation.
GIULIANI: To the foundation.
TAPPER: Can I ask you a question about Don McGahn?
GIULIANI: But wait. Wait. No, I want to finish the thought. It’s a really important thought.
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: That man is told the same information that Mifsud gave him. And all it says is, the Russians have…
TAPPER: The Russians have information, these e-mails from Hillary Clinton.
GIULIANI: That does not justify…
TAPPER: But it was true. And it was an attack on the United States.
GIULIANI: But it doesn’t justify an investigation of Donald Trump as candidate for president of the United States. There is right now as much evidence that Obama may have known about the Steele dossier and affidavits as Trump might have known about that, in fact, more, because there’s a text between Strzok and Page.
TAPPER: I don’t know any….
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: Oh, yes, you do.
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: Barack Obama — that President Obama knew?
GIULIANI: They said the Obama administration is on top of this.
TAPPER: I want to go…
GIULIANI: I didn’t say he knew.
TAPPER: Yes.
GIULIANI: I said there’s evidence that would suggest. You should follow it up and find out.
TAPPER: OK. I will — I will…
GIULIANI: You shouldn’t investigate him.
TAPPER: I want to ask you because you have been talking about Don…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: If we did that, this place would go crazy.
TAPPER: I want to — I want to talk about Don McGahn, because the question of obstruction of justice is one — is the second volume of this report.
GIULIANI: Correct.
TAPPER: In — one of the examples of potential — it doesn’t reach a conclusion of — kicks it to Congress — obstruction of justice has to do with President Trump directing White House counsel at the time Don McGahn to have Rod Rosenstein fire the special counsel.
You said that account from McGahn was — quote — “inaccurate.” Now, McGahn’s attorney responded, saying — quote — “It’s a mystery why Rudy Giuliani feels the need to relitigate incidents that the attorney general and deputy attorney general have concluded were not obstruction, but they are accurately described in the report.”So, McGahn is standing by his account…
GIULIANI: Which…
TAPPER: … as Mueller — the account that President Trump told him, get rid of Bob Mueller. (CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: I would ask his lawyer, I would ask his — have you read, page 117, 118 of the report? I would ask, which of three versions is McGahn standing by? There are three versions he gives of that account. Version number one, which was put in “The New York Times,” which may be…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: No, let’s just stick to what is in the Mueller report.
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: No. It’s all in the report.
GIULIANI: I will get out 117, if you want. They do recite it, but then they select the version most harmful to the president. Version number one…
TAPPER: But which part do you dispute? Which one do you…
GIULIANI: Well, I have to explain it. The first version that he — that he says is, the president told me to fire him because he was upset about conflict of interest, and I told him I resign, version number one.
TAPPER: Right.
GIULIANI: He then corrects it and says, oh, mistake, he never told — he never — he never — he never said fire, and I never told him I would resign.
TAPPER: He said, get rid of him.
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: No, no, there’s an intermediate step.
TAPPER: He can’t be special counsel.
GIULIANI: He said, he has conflicts and he shouldn’t be special counsel.
TAPPER: He shouldn’t be special counsel. Well, what does that convey to you? What does that suggest to you?
GIULIANI: Oh, it’s far different than fire. Fire is nice and clear. Fire is, get rid of him.
TAPPER: He shouldn’t be special counsel.
GIULIANI: He shouldn’t be special counsel means, it’s wrong that he’s special counsel. It doesn’t say any specific action. Well, then he changes it again and says, well, I thought that meant get rid of him.
TAPPER: That’s what he thought it meant.
GIULIANI: Well, OK, but that isn’t — that isn’t what he said.
TAPPER: So you’re not denying that he said he shouldn’t be special counsel; you’re denying that he meant fire him?
GIULIANI: The point I was making is, he has three different versions. Now, you tell me, as a trial lawyer, what would I do with that in front of a jury?
TAPPER: Mm-hmm.
GIULIANI: Guy’s got three different versions of something as important as this? You know what you do? You say, I can’t rely on him.
TAPPER: He said, “Mueller has to go,” I think is the exact quote, “Mueller has to go.”
GIULIANI: No, no. One version of it is — one version of it is, he has conflicts and he shouldn’t be special counsel. Quote. Those were in quotes, right in the report, middle of the page, page 117. Very sloppy. And then, as a prosecutor, you can’t select the version that’s the most harmful. You got to go with the version that’s the most helpful in order to determine if there ever…
TAPPER: So, are you suggesting that McGahn is lying?
GIULIANI: No. I’m telling you, he’s confused.
TAPPER: So, he’s confused.
GIULIANI: He gave three different versions.
TAPPER: So, let me ask you a question. McGahn…
GIULIANI: But the special counsel comes to the conclusion he is definitively telling the truth. And his lawyer is saying that — his lawyer should tell us which of those three versions is true. And how does he know which one is true now, when he couldn’t figure it out then?
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: Here’s what we have. McGahn, who is well-regarded in Washington, D.C., saying that he thought President Trump was telling him to fire the special counsel.
GIULIANI: But what he thinks is not…
TAPPER: But that’s what he thought. He took contemporaneous notes.
GIULIANI: Good.
TAPPER: He told his attorney at the time. And he testified…
GIULIANI: Would you like to know what the president thought?
TAPPER: And he testified under oath. President Trump is denying it. He refused to testify under oath. And he does have a history of lying. Why should people…
GIULIANI: Well, that’s your — that’s your — that’s your…
TAPPER: Was Barack Obama born in the United States? I mean, like, there’s a long history of President Trump saying things that aren’t true.
GIULIANI: Was — was — OK. Let’s not go into…
TAPPER: Right.
GIULIANI: … a man’s total — did Barack Obama lie about, you can keep your doctor and you can keep your insurance? Did he lie when…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: We’re not talking about Barack Obama. We’re talking about President Trump’s credibility…
GIULIANI: OK. But…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: President Trump’s credibility vs. Don McGahn’s.
GIULIANI: So, we’re going to start taking disputed arguments about politics, and we’re going to use it in a criminal case? That’s — that’s — then that’s really crazy.
TAPPER: If he had told him fire — fire him, would it have been obstruction of justice?
GIULIANI: No. It would not have been. But he didn’t.
TAPPER: But he didn’t — but he didn’t do it?
GIULIANI: The version — the second version is about as close to the truth as you’re going to get, I think. But the reality is that there are independent witnesses they didn’t bother to interview who would say, at that time, the president was not taking the position that Mueller should be fired. In fact, Mueller was reassured that he wouldn’t be fired.
TAPPER: Right.
GIULIANI: Those witnesses were not interviewed. Second, there are witnesses that dispute that McGahn’s version is correct — or a witness that disputes whether that’s correct, not false. We don’t have to jump to the conclusion false.
How about when a guy…
TAPPER: McGahn is standing by it. And he told people…
GIULIANI: Which one is he standing by?
TAPPER: He’s standing by the version in the report.
GIULIANI: No, he isn’t. I didn’t hear that from this lawyer.
TAPPER: He said he — he said the report — they’re accurately described in the report.
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: There are three versions. Which one? The first one, the fire version, the second one, or the third one? There are three.
We don’t know which one McGahn is sticking by. And I don’t really care which one McGahn is sticking by, because it’s so hopelessly confused. It’s unfair to use that.TAPPER: McGahn thought that the president was telling him to fire special counsel Mueller.
GIULIANI: Well, he’s wrong.
TAPPER: That’s what he — that is the bottom line.
GIULIANI: He’s wrong. And here’s the way…
TAPPER: And he’s — but why should…
GIULIANI: Here’s the way…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: My question is, why should — if McGahn has a history of telling the truth — he was under oath. He took contemporaneous notes, and he told somebody contemporaneously.
GIULIANI: I didn’t say… TAPPER: Why should anybody believe the president’s version?
GIULIANI: Maybe they’re too defensive. I didn’t say McGahn was lying. I just, in great detail, explained to you testimony…
TAPPER: You think he’s confused, you say.
GIULIANI: … that is hopefully confused. It cannot be relied on. If I were a prosecutor evaluating that, I got three different statements from one guy, I got a clear statement from the other guy, and the guy was never fired, I would come to the conclusion that either this version is correct, because it’s clear, or…
TAPPER: McGahn said he refused to fire him.
GIULIANI: Or how about I can’t — well, I know he said that.
TAPPER: Right.
GIULIANI: But if, in fact, he wasn’t told to fire him, that’s like a tree falling in the forest.
TAPPER: No, he said that he was — he took that as an order to fire him. And he refused to do it. He would have resigned.
GIULIANI: But he took as a — it wasn’t an order to fire him.
TAPPER: Let me ask you, because we’re running out of time. There are 12 other investigations that have been kicked to other prosecutors. And we don’t know what they are. There 14 total, but we know what two of them are.
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: One is Cohen. And one is Greg Craig, Obama’s former chief White House counsel. Then there are 12 others we don’t know.
And the Mueller report also makes a point that presidents can be prosecuted once they leave office.GIULIANI: Boy, they — those — those angry Democrats would love to see that.
TAPPER: Well, my question for you is, are you concerned, as President Trump’s lawyer…
GIULIANI: No, I’m not concerned.
TAPPER: … about further legal jeopardy?
GIULIANI: They took their best shot. That report is a one-sided document, which you’re treating as gospel.
TAPPER: I’m treating it as a prosecutorial document, as you — as you noted.
GIULIANI: Well, any prosecutorial document is a one-sided document, even if the prosecutor is fair. And when you have got one who isn’t, who’s got a bias against…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: You don’t think Robert Mueller is fair?
GIULIANI: I don’t think his people were fair.
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: I don’t think that report is fair.
TAPPER: But he signed his name to it, whatever you think is fair.
GIULIANI: But he should never have signed his name to a document that says on page two that he has to be convinced that the president didn’t do it. When did a prosecutor ever have to be convinced he didn’t do it? That is taking the burden of proof in America, flipping it around, only on Donald Trump.
TAPPER: So, we…
GIULIANI: He has to be able to prove that the person did it. You read that first two paragraphs, and you understand anything about the law or the ethics of a prosecutor, that’s a horrendous statement. It says, he can’t be — even the statement that…
TAPPER: So we shouldn’t take this as exoneration of the president because the document is not credible?
GIULIANI: We shouldn’t take it as exoneration of the president…
TAPPER: You’re saying that this document is not credible.
GIULIANI: No. No. You’re — how about looking at it this way? People who were unfair to him, people who wrote an unfair report, people who came close to torturing people to get information and break them…
TAPPER: Came close to torturing people?
GIULIANI: Yes. How about — how about having…
TAPPER: Wait. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa. Whoa.
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: How about having Manafort…
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: Came close to torturing people?
GIULIANI: Yes, how about having Manafort in solitary confinement and questioning him 13 times?
Maybe torture is too much.
TAPPER: You were a prosecutor. Did you put people in solitary confinement?
GIULIANI: To question them? Absolutely not. I put them in solitary confinement — I put one in solitary confinement because he threatened to kill, Carmine Persico, who just died a while ago. Did I put him in solitary confinement and bring him back 13 times to question him, telling they’re lying, telling them that they really knew that the president was involved in the collusion, when they didn’t? No, I never did that. And I would fire anybody who did it. And Andrew Weissmann never should have been working for him, because Andrew Weissmann is a hit man dead, demonstrated…
TAPPER: Andrew Weissmann a hit man?
GIULIANI: A hit man in terms of the way in which he operates as a…
TAPPER: He’s an aggressive prosecutor.
GIULIANI: Yes, read Sidney Powell’s book about how he prosecuted the people from Arthur Andersen. The case went out 9-0 the Supreme Court, no crime committed, Arthur Andersen destroyed. Look at Merrill Lynch people, kept in jail for seven months, found innocent, and he wouldn’t let them out on bail pending appeal in a white-collar case. Look at the situations in which he withheld exculpatory evidence. This guy shouldn’t have been working.
TAPPER: Right.
GIULIANI: And I will amend hit man, if anybody is too sensitive to that.
TAPPER: Well, I’m not sensitive about it. I just mean…
GIULIANI: What I mean is unethical — unethical prosecutor. But you guys didn’t care that he put together a staff of Hillary- loving, Trump-hating people, led by an investigator who, luckily, we have his texts, wanted to prevent Donald Trump from being president and wanted to remove him afterwards.
TAPPER: Robert Mueller, very well-regarded, Republican, former head of the FBI.
GIULIANI: Maybe he wasn’t paying attention.
TAPPER: When he was appointed, Republicans, including President Trump supporters…
GIULIANI: Me too.
TAPPER: … like Newt Gingrich and yourself, praised him.
GIULIANI: And when he — you got it.
TAPPER: Then he put forward a report that ultimately cleared President Trump of conspiracy.
GIULIANI: And that takes every cheap shot imaginable, because he couldn’t prove it.
TAPPER: You call them cheap shots. Other people call it evidence,.
GIULIANI: But you don’t — you don’t just spew out all this stuff, and not criticize it. Why don’t we hear in there how often Cohen perjured himself under oath, as a way of evaluating the truthfulness of what Cohen is saying today?
TAPPER: Unfortunately, I have to cut you off because we’re out of time.
GIULIANI: If you think that’s a one — if you think that’s a fair document, when it’s using a standard of proof that you have to absolutely prove your innocence, then we’re living in a different country other than America.
TAPPER: I think of…
(CROSSTALK)
GIULIANI: And if Bob — maybe Bob didn’t read that carefully. But that infects the entire document.
TAPPER: Well…
GIULIANI: I mean, when people have to prove their innocence, we’re in a different country. And that’s the standard.
And, by the way…TAPPER: Yes.
GIULIANI: … the president is innocent. He is definitely innocent of both.
TAPPER: Yes.
GIULIANI: And why aren’t people now equally interested in, how about all the connections that the Hillary campaign had with Ukraine? And did that have something to do with the genesis of the information on him and Manafort?
TAPPER: Mr. Mayor, that’s all the time we have. Thank you so much for being here. Happy Easter.
GIULIANI: The Ukraine is investigating the Clinton campaign…
TAPPER: Happy — Happy Easter to you and your family..
GIULIANI: … for being involved with Ukraine.
TAPPER: Mm-hmm.
GIULIANI: And that hasn’t been covered by a single American newspaper, except…
TAPPER: Russia attacked the United States. The report makes that clear. You agree with that and…
GIULIANI: And the president of the United States is — and the president of the United States…
TAPPER: OK.
GIULIANI: … was falsely accused of being involved in a crime tantamount to treason. That’s a disgrace. And somebody has now have to have — has to have an equal enthusiasm about finding the truth of that.
Otherwise, you are prejudiced.
TAPPER: OK.
Mr. Mayor, thank you so much. Happy Easter.
GIULIANI: Thank you.
TAPPER: Thanks for being here. Appreciate it.
I don’t know about you, but I need a drink after that.
Basically, the report was a sloppy document of an unfair investigation done by hitmen who tortured people. The public has a right to know what’s in a rival political campaign chairman’s private emails also Hillary and Obama are the real guilty ones who did all the things that they said Trump did and it was totally wrong when they did it. And anyway everybody lies and cheats and they would all take information from Russians because it’s not illegal.
The president is a totally innocent man who was falsely accused even though people high in the campaign and even his own son were doing something that anyone would think was unethical except nobody cares about that anyway.
The president is totally vindicated and it’s time to move on.
Giuliani on Fox:
cray-cray.