America is a country of lawyers. “And of the dentists,” some will add, and perhaps they will be right, but in this case, the dentists have nothing to do with it.
In today's America it is dangerous to defend a legitimately elected president: through the efforts of liberals, his figure has acquired the features of some Tolkien Sauron, who simply cannot have any positive features. For example, the other day, the owner of Goya Foods, Robert Unanu, after a visit to the White House, had the imprudence to call Trump’s presidency “blessed” - and progressive US politicians immediately called for a boycott of the company's products, and Congressional Congresswoman Okasio-Cortes courageously declared that she would learn to make Latin American herself adobo marinade, just not to buy it in a company supporting Trump. Is it any wonder that all of the United States can hardly scrape together a dozen journalists talking about the president without ritual curses on him?
But if supporting Trump journalists can be counted on the fingers of two hands, then in order to list prominent pro-presidential lawyers, there will be many even one hand. And Trump's personal lawyer, Rudi Giuliani, is on this short list of honorable first place. Unlike many other "loers", he never let him down (like, for example, Michael Cohen, who, being pressed by Müller’s people, immediately began to water Trump with mud) and did not question his actions. The president and his lawyer are really connected by an old friendship, and they have a lot in common: they were both born and raised in New York (Trump in Queens, Giuliani in Brooklyn), both from relatively immigrant families (Trump from German-Scottish, Giuliani's parents emigrated from Italian Tuscany), both in love with America's most famous and most atypical city - Trump built skyscrapers here, Giuliani was the mayor of the city from 1994 to 2001 and remained in the memory of New Yorkers as one of the most effective city governors.
For more than a year now, Rudi Giuliani, almost the only political heavyweight who has supported Trump, has been waging a lonely and almost hopeless fight against the notorious deep state - the “deep state”. The second heavyweight, perhaps US Attorney General William Barr, whom the liberal media suspect of preparing an “October surprise” just before the presidential election, but this is inaccurate. It is known, however, that the cautious Barr towards Giuliani is cautious and in private conversations allegedly warned Trump that the investigation of Giuliani in Ukraine "could create risks for the presidential administration."
I first wrote about the investigation of Giuliani in May 2019 in the column “Dark Secrets of Kiev”. Since then, it has moved far: if at first it seemed that we were talking only about corruption schemes of the Biden family, in which money, although large but not astronomical, was laundered, then the more documents and evidence appeared in the hands of a presidential lawyer, the more epic the scale became a scam launched by the American elite in Ukraine (more precisely, that part of it that is closely connected with the US Democratic Party). In December last year, it was already clear that the “Ukrainian direction” of American foreign policy turned into a semi-mafia cartel, pumping money and resources from the occupied territory. In this scheme, it is believed that not only American diplomats were involved, but also Vice President Biden, congressmen (the same Adam Schiff), officials from the FBI and the Justice Ministry, people from the Obama team, and maybe even the 44th President of the U.S.A.
And on July 10, Rudi Giuliani uploaded a 43-minute film on YouTube about the fate of the Obama / Biden administration’s investments in Ukraine in the amount of no less than $ 5.3 billion.
We are talking about "gratuitous aid" to the country building a "young democracy" - the billions that flowed from the US budget to the accounts of Ukrainian banks since 2015. They flowed in the framework of 440 different “projects” and “programs” of technical and humanitarian cooperation - mostly dummies (though, by January 2017, the last month when Obama was in the White House, the number of projects fell to 390, but the amount of funds increased to $ 5.2 billion). At the same time, the money was "invested" not where the Ukrainian "partners" requested, but only where investors considered it necessary to invest. All these projects were in the “gray zone”, that is, they were not evaluated for effectiveness or audited. It is not known what actually this rather big money was actually spent on. Most likely, they also leaked back freely - only not to the US budget, but to the accounts of very specific companies that belonged either to the Obama administration itself or to people closely associated with this administration. In any case, it can be argued that $ 3 billion out of more than five "invested" in Ukrainian democracy has seriously improved the financial situation of its American curators.
In other words, according to Giuliani, Obama and Biden turned Ukraine into one big “laundry”.
Well, and how after that the first black president of the United States and his respectable vice differ from the drug lords of Mexico and Colombia?
Except that the drug lords launder the dirty money received from the sale of cocaine, and Obama, Biden and their henchmen could launder the money of American taxpayers coming to the US Treasury budget. Moreover, perhaps the fact that the drug lords do not cover up their dark machinations with hypocritical rants about democracy and human rights.
At the same time, Giuliani has witnesses (ready to testify under oath), there are documents received from the new government of Ukraine (President Zelensky, albeit reluctantly, fearing the revenge of influential shadow figures, still gave his officials a go-ahead for working with Trump's lawyer). There is, after all, the opportunity to bring their discoveries to a wide American audience. At the end of winter, Giuliani undertook a tour throughout America, during which he talked with the press and the public, talking about corruption schemes of the Obama administration in Ukraine.
But Giuliani managed to go around only a few cities - and very wrong time for his main client and very time for his opponents the COVID-19 pandemic struck. And now there are even more documents and certificates in his hands. Take at least Derkach’s scandalous films, published in May, proving that Ukraine was controlled by Biden practically in manual mode! Since it is impossible to deny the authenticity of the films, the Biden team uses snapped-up cliches: Michael Carpenter, Biden's foreign policy adviser, who joined the Senile Joe team from the Pentagon, called the Derkach films "a KGB-style disinformation operation involving pro-Russian forces in Ukraine."
But in general, the American media is simply strikingly indifferent to exposing the "devil's advocate." No, journalists don’t forget about Giuliani himself: for the last couple of days, liberals have been vying to comment on Rudi’s statement on Fox News that Trump’s tax returns were audited by the IRS (the IRS) - "maybe not the last, but in general" .
It would seem that this is so? But the liberals are already enthusiastic, they just haven’t sprayed their saliva: well, Giuliani “framed” Trump, Giuliani “deprived him of his last trump card”! What a holiday!
The logic of the liberals is simple: indeed, since the time of his presidential campaign, Trump has repeatedly stated that he would like to publish his tax returns to the public, as all presidential candidates do, but he cannot, because the IRS checks them. And now, right on the eve of the election, Giuliani deprived the president of such a “powerful excuse”!
Of course, Giuliani did not set Trump up. In a situation where the U.S. Supreme Court, by a majority of seven votes to two, decided that the Manhattan prosecutor would gain access to Trump's tax data (and Democrats of the House of Representatives, by the way, would not!), This was the best possible move. Moreover, even if the Manhattan prosecutor unearths some violations in Trump's tax returns, this will not happen soon and is unlikely to affect the outcome of the elections. But another thing is important.
Giuliani says: Obama and Biden laundered $ 3 billion to 5.3 billion in Ukraine, Obama and Biden prevented the investigation of this missing money, using leverage over both the FBI and the Ukrainian prosecutor’s office!
The American media are silent, turn away, pretend that they have not heard anything.
Giuliani says Trump's tax returns have been audited by the IRS.
American media: “Yeah, now the Manhattan attorney will definitely nuke this racist and puzzler!” Why didn’t the Trump get the Tax Service itself, nobody was interested in it, but the media was blown up by the fireworks of witty comments, biting headlines, assumptions about how much money Trump had withheld from the tax authorities.
In general, it seems that all the painstaking work done by Rudi Giuliani in unraveling corruption schemes, presumably Obama / Biden, is the voice of one crying in the desert. All the same, none of the supporters of the former vice president will turn his back on him, no matter how many foreign prosecutors Biden dismisses to protect his family’s business interests. All the same, none of Obama's ardent admirers will be disappointed in the “most progressive president,” even if it turns out that the billions that disappeared in Ukraine went straight into his pocket.
There is, of course, a non-zero probability that the “devil’s advocate” will be able to stir up those “shy voters” who, as the most perspicacious sociologists suggest, are in no hurry to reveal their political preferences in the course of opinion polls.
But so far, we are seeing a sad picture of the final oblivion of American journalism of those principles that once provided it with fame and authority throughout the world. Objectivity, the desire at all costs (even at the cost of reputation risks) to get to the bottom of the truth, a neutral attitude to certain individuals, a thorough verification of facts - all this has sunk into the past. The party-class triumph, that is (with reference to the conditions of the present USA), the party-racial approach. And it is unlikely that one lawyer can change this.
Even if it’s the devil’s lawyer.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.