Giuliani: There is nothing wrong about taking information from the Russians.

[Stuart G]

Source: CNN


Washington (CNN) -- President Donald Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani said while he would have advised the Trump campaign to avoid Russian help, he thought there was nothing wrong with a campaign taking information from Russia.

"There's nothing wrong with taking information from Russians," Giuliani said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."

Asked by CNN's Jake Tapper if he would have taken information from a foreign source, Giuliani said, "I probably wouldn't."

"I wasn't asked," Giuliani said. "I would have advised, just out of excess of caution, don't do it."

Giuliani's comments came in an extended rebuttal to Utah GOP Sen. Mitt Romney, who issued a statement Friday saying he was "sickened" by the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller's recently released report.

The former New York mayor -- and 2008 presidential candidate in a GOP field that included Romney -- said Romney should "stop the bull," but conceded he did not know that Romney accepted information from foreign sources.

Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/21/politics/rudy-giuliani-trump-russia-cnntv/index.html

[mr_lebowski]

1. If it HADN'T BEEN FUCKING STOLEN FROM THE OPPOSITE PARTY'S HQ?

Okay, it's maybe not so bad, in that case, Rudy.

BUT IT WAS. And he fucking knew it. Everyone KNEW these were STOLEN DNC DOCS.

And that's what ACTUALLY makes this really F'd up. Not JUST that it was a foreign enemy.

[House of Roberts]

2. Oppo research is something of value in a political campaign.

Accepting something of value from a foreign source is a campaign contribution and a violation of election law, just as much as accepting cash from a foreign source.

[mr_lebowski]

3. The problem was Mueller couldn't nail them on 'accepting' it ...

We all (pretty much) know that the arrangement was for the Docs to be released through online sources like DCLeaks and Wikileaks, but Mueller wasn't apparently able to get anyone at the TT June meeting to 'cop' to that arrangement.

Instead they were able to weasel out of trouble with 'well, they didn't GIVE us anything!'

And I suspected this would be 'the problem' all along, and for the last 1.5 years I've said the only way they're getting nailed for a criminal act here is to prove that Jr or Manafort agreed to drop sanctions if Russia would 'release' the Documents. Either that, or prove that they ever took possession of the docs, such as maybe if Parscale had gotten some docs directly.

There's also a $ minimum before it becomes Criminal rather than Civil, and how do you assign a $ value to 'Stolen DNC Docs'? It's pretty nebulous, sadly ...

Russia, and Manafort ... are friggin' pros at this.

[Calista241]

16. No, Mueller couldn't prove they incited the Russians to steal the info.

Lots of mainstream news sources published the info from Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0.

[mr_lebowski]

17. That too, of course that would've been even worse.

But they couldn't prove a quid pro quo being offered to incite DC/Wikileaks to release the docs either ... this MIGHT have been illegal had they been able to prove ... whereas, yeah, if they incited the theft in the first place, that would've been a slam-dunk crime.

Others re-posting the original Wikileaks leaked info is immaterial I would think.

[Evolve Dammit]

4. How far you have fallen Rudy. Or maybe you were always corrupt??

[durablend]

5. Full of s*it as usual

""There's nothing wrong with taking information from Russians," Giuliani said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union." "

And if it were a Democrat that did it you people would be yelling "TRAITOR!"

[louis c]

6. This is just unbeleivable...

...it's as if Charles Lindbergh was running against FDR in 1940 and Lucky Lindy accepted help in the election from Adolf Hitler.

Am I on another planet?

[Neoma]

7. Who the fuck is giving this creep airtime.

[Stuart G]

8. I may be wrong, but I believe there will be a whole lot of "creeps" who get "airtime"

in the next year and 18 months. We ain't seen nothing yet....

[htuttle]

9. We're a long, long way from "I have nothing to do with Russia," aren't we?

[forgotmylogin]

10. So are they fine with Democrats taking help from any country who offers it?

Let's just open the whole thing up. Government is all for sale anyway.

[DallasNE]

11. It Is Not A One Way Transaction

Trump took information from the Russians. What did he give in return. So far, it is looking like he pretty much gave them the farm. And that is conspiracy.

Now Mueller didn't say he found no conspiracy. He said he couldn't establish the intent necessary to prove beyond a reasonable doubt because nobody would talk (they took the 5th). To me that bordered on witness tampering by Trump - that Trump would take care of them with the presumption of a pardon. Indeed, I often felt the Mueller danced on the head of a pin and backed off because he seemed to fear that he might not be staying strictly between the lines Rosenstein had drawn for him.

Impeachment does not require the high bar standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. It is more like a civil proceeding where only a preponderance of evidence is necessary so the House could draw up an Article of Impeachment for conspiracy.

[Turbineguy]

12. Of course not.....

but only if you lie about it first and then try and cover up that you did it.

[sarcasmo]

13. The House should subpoena Rudy and let that fool ramble.

[Vinca]

14. So he'll be fine with it if Russia decides to create havoc by pushing the Dem candidate?

It could happen. Vlad just wants to bat the hornet's nest.

[dem in texas]

15. Here is what a True American President would do

If he or she is contacted by a country that has been unidentified as a foreign adversary, would immediately contact the FBI and let them know what is going on. A Real American President would not meet in secret with the head of a foreign adversary country. A True American President would turn over any information about a foreign adversary to the FBI or CIA.