Rudy Giuliani: ‘There’s Nothing Wrong With Taking Information From Russians’

@CNNSotu/Twitter

Rudy Giuliani defended President Donald Trump on Sunday by arguing “there’s nothing wrong with taking information from Russians.”

Giuliani was quick to shield the president at Sen. Mitt Romney‘s (R-Utah) expense when CNN “State of the Union” host Jake Tapper asked for a response to the senator’s condemnation of the Trump campaign’s actions documented in the Mueller report.

Calling the senator a “hypocrite,” the Trump lawyer claimed “any candidate in the whole world would take information” that would be advantageous to their campaign.

“Who says it’s even illegal?” Giuliani added, before attacking the role of media.

Watch the video below, via CNN:

“There’s nothing wrong with taking information from Russians,” Giuliani exclaimed, adding, “It depends on where it came from.”

The lawyer further debated that it shouldn’t be assumed the exchange of information was a “campaign contribution,” despite Russian officials previously expressing their desired outcome of the election was a Trump presidency.

However, when Tapper asked Giuliani if he would employ the same behaviors in his own campaign, the lawyer said he wouldn’t due to “excess of caution.”

“I probably wouldn’t. I wasn’t asked,” he responded. “I would have advised, just out of excess of caution, don’t do it.”

Pointing out Giuliani’s perceived hypocrisy, Tapper pinned the lawyer on his contradictory comments, eliciting Giuliani to staunchly reply, “There’s no crime.”

“We’re going to get into morality? That isn’t what prosecutors look at — morality,” he added, striking a similar tone to his previous defense of Trump that we shouldn’t  make “moral judgments” about politicians because “we’ll have nobody in public office.”

Giuliani also attempted to excuse the Trump campaign for receiving information from Russia on NBC’s “Meet the Press” with Chuck Todd.

Watch the video below, via NBC:

The lawyer went on to argue that whether it’s permissible to receive information from a foreign adversary “depends on the stolen material.”

What do you think?

11 pledges
Upvote Downvote
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
I. Chin
Member

Sometimes it’s in the interest of Russia to release actual information. They warned the US about the Tsarnaev brothers who later went on to terrorize Boston.

Phyllis Softa
Member

Hey, Russia, your interference in our elections is okay with Trumpsters. And hey, Iran & China, Trumpsters will be fine if you just happen to hack and release the RNC and Brad Pascal’s email accounts.

James
Member

Where’s your proof; or, are you closely related to Schiff? BTW; why wasn’t anything done when Muslim #44 spent American taxpayer money to interfere in Israel and Egypt’s elections? Guess that was A-OK since he was masquerading as a D with the fake news media approval.

banstan
Member

Once again, you speak gibberish, philly. When the TRUTH is spoken, Russian interference seems to be OK with all obummerites, like yourself. FACT, obummer KNEW about Russian interference. FACT obummer did NOTHING about Russian interference because he was too stupid to see it was helping Trump. I personally am very sorry you obummerites are just as stupid as your messiah.

Phyllis Softa
Member

I’m overlooking your obtuseness as I am going to bet you wish to emulate TRUMP. Just because Trump media didn’t covering the refusal of McConnell to agree to a joint public statement on the Russian interference is no reason for you NOT to be informed. Google it to see McConnell’s threat if Obama went public without him. Google Obama’s conversation with Putin. I have difficulty following Trumpian logic. One moment you go wacky & claim Obama spied on Trump & the next he did nothing.

banstan
Member

You sure do lie a lot about not ever insulting anybody here. What threat of McConnell’s are you talking about? The threat that he would say obummer was interfering in the election to help Hilliarly? Are you REALLY saying that obummer was AFRAID of Mitch? REALLY? Sounds like a pretty weak excuse, philly.

Phyllis Softa
Member

You are a grown man. The “obummer” name calling is something tells readers you have not gotten over having a D POTUS or you want your fellow IJR buddies to perceive you are one of them. God gave you a brain-USE IT. You have a search engine–USE IT. The fear was not of McConnell or even Trump–the fear was how easily duped Trump supporters are that you would buy Trump’s “It;s rigged” repeated claims of 2016. Your reaction if he made good on his threats to refuse to concede.

Phyllis Softa
Member

If you wish to post an obtuse comment, I am going to call it out. If you find it insulting, so be it. If you did not possess common sense, I would simply ignore you. Uncertain why you wish to portray yourself as an easily manipulated young man.

banstan
Member

You are, quite simply, the most arrogant, self-absorbed person I’ve ever come across. Your false sense of self-importance and superior intellect comes reeking through with every rant that you make.

Phyllis Softa
Member

So, pointing out the flaws in one’s logic is “insulting”?? Is arrogant? Is self absorbed? I’m suppose to ignore it because it might hurt someone’s feelings?? Self absorbed would be allowing them to pretend repeating the thoughts of Trump makes them appear as if they know what they are talking about? They may be acceptable in Trump World, but when they step into reality they are going to find logic & facts matter. Would you rather me tell you online or have someone laugh in your face?

banstan
Member

So, from “I NEVER insult anybody here” to “so be it”. A TRUE liberal. Your armchair psychiatry got old a long time ago, philly. So has your false sense of superior intellect. A long, LONG time ago. The next several months are going to be very difficult for you prog/left/libs

I. Chin
Member

She cannot be reasoned with. She’s also hypocritical on her “no insults” policy as she directed more than a few at me. She’s a liar.

The best one can do is point and laugh at her TDS. She truly is a one-hit blunder.

Phyllis Softa
Member

LOL… pointing out your errors is NOT insulting you NOR does it make me a liar. Stop being such a snowflake. Yes, I have thought your conclusions were in the category of “screwball” but I have never called you screwball. Yes, I believe your willingness to believe everything Trump says is deranged. If that hurts your feelings, imagine what history will say about you. Trust me, I have been kind.

banstan
Member

“Yes, I believe your willingness to believe everything Trump says is deranged.” You have absolutely ZERO evidence to back up that I believe everything Trump says. Your WHOLE comment shows the TRUTH about what I’ve said about you on this site.

banstan
Member

“”One moment you go wacky & claim Obama spied on Trump & the next he did nothing.” Since you will never find anywhere here that I said obummer spied on Trump, and, since you are the one saying that obummer was afraid of Mitch McConnell, who REALLY is the wacky one here?

Phyllis Softa
Member

Read above as to whom the fear was of. It is not as if the rallies portrayed Trump supporters as law abiding citizens.

banstan
Member

you are just plain full of it.

Phyllis Softa
Member

It appears that the last person you found “full of it” you voted for POTUS. NOT INTERESTED.
You must have found Trump full of it since you deny believing everything he says. Mexico wasn’t going to pay for the wall. A wall on 1 side of the country wasn’t going to reduce migrants & drugs smuggled at legal ports of entry. You knew he did not have a healthcare plan. And you knew his tax reform plan would not pay for itself.

banstan
Member

You talking about the rally in San Jose where Trump supporters were “funneled” into a hostile crowd and got the crap kicked out of them? Is THAT what you are talking about?

Phyllis Softa
Member

No, not familiar with that rally.

banstan
Member

Of course you’re not. That would make you informed.

Phyllis Softa
Member

So “inform” me. WHO “funneled” Trump supporters into a hostile crowd to get the crap kicked out of them? One would assume conservative media would APPROVE if Trump campaign rallies were the dreaded “gun-free zones”, SO WHY did these victims not exercise their 2nd amendment rts? If these are the “biggest crowds” how were the MAGA’s unable to defend themselves? Did the crowds outside outnumber the one’s leaving? That can’t be. Trump always says he has thousands more supporters outside.

banstan
Member

You just keep digging your uninformed hole deeper and deeper. “SO WHY did these victims not exercise their 2nd amendment rts?” That question shows your ignorance about Trump supporters on many levels.

Phyllis Softa
Member

SO INFORM ME! But keep in mind that I live with Trump supporter.

banstan
Member

Inform YOURSELF, or stay uninformed philly. Your choice and ONLY your choice. Use your beloved google like you tell everyone else to use here. Like most, if not all, longtime visitors to this site, we don’t believe for a second that you live with a Trump supporter.

Phyllis Softa
Member

WHO would claim their husband is an avid Trump supporter if he is not? Does that appear to be something a sane person would lie about? I would love to tell you that he isn’t! I actually do owe you credit for enlightening me to the “Mueller did not write all of the report” concept. He voiced his opinion that Andrew Weissmann wrote the letter to Barr, not Mueller. He says he arrived at that conclusion based on Weissmann writing the Obstruction of Justice part of the Mueller report.

Phyllis Softa
Member

My husband is such an avid Trump supporter that he has NOT read one word of the Mueller report. NOT read the Barr summary, Not read the Mueller letter. BUT he “knows” Trump was “exonerated of collusion and obstruction.” You will also be happy to hear that he “knows” Trump will win again in 2020. My husband is a different generation than you, but you share many of the same views.—

banstan
Member

Your husband seems to conveniently fit your description of “all ignorant” Trump supporters. Gee, what a convenient coincidence. I call shenanigans. It seems that you need to practice your armchair psychiatry on yourself.

I. Chin
Member

Who? A liar.

banstan
Member

“WHO would claim their husband is an avid Trump supporter if he is not?” A liar like you. A twister of facts. A huge fan of innuendo. Someone who can NEVER stay on point of any comment. Someone JUST LIKE YOU. That’s who.

Phyllis Softa
Member

In 2015-16 ALL cable news outlets aired for free every Trump rally from his introductory speech to his departing the stage. I have seen a few clips of 2019 rallies and I don’t see any changes. The crowds still want to build a wall even if it’s not going to reduce smuggling at legal ports of entry; lock up Hillary- even if no charges were filed, and the press should only publish “alternative facts.” Keeping up with Trump rallies is not my idea of being informed. Watched 1, watched them all.

I. Chin
Member

Gee, Phil, maybe their tactic of promoting Trump as the least threatening to Hillary backfired on them.

Just like the collusion delusion.

Maybe the meat puppets and talking heads on cable “news” DON’T know as much as they pretend.

Phyllis Softa
Member

They promoted Trump as entertainment. Where did you get the idea they considered him “the least threatening”? How was showing crowds of Americans pretending as if they were attending a WWE event not threatening to the perception of the SANITY of America???

I. Chin
Member

There’re neuroses like your TDS and then there are psychoses. You know this

How’s the Congress been working since 2016? Anything important getting done like immigration reform? Would you consider that FUNCTIONAL insanity or full-blown psychosis?

Phyllis Softa
Member

Did Hannity claiming he BELIEVED Trump did not know anything about Stormy’s NDA or the payment work out as knowledgeable? Is Hannity’s Seth Rich theory knowledgeable? Is Hannity’s “complete exoneration” claim credible? ONLY to those who are afraid to read the Mueller report. Your collusion delusion is debunked on page TWO!! You did not get very far.

banstan
Member

Left field, AGAIN. Stay on point, philly.

I. Chin
Member

So…you’re imitating Nadler, Schiff, and the others who refuse to recognize that their snipe-hunt came up empty.

Phyllis Softa
Member

I don’t need to imitate anyone. I read the report online twice—a feat with bifocals off of a lap top screen. I ordered the published version and am reading it for a 3rd time. I KNOW what is in the report. DO YOU? Or are you working off of a premise of what Trump told you? Remember Trump told you “No one from the Trump campaign had contacts with Russians”–140 are listed in the report. Even in Trump World 140 is not zero.

I. Chin
Member

Phyllis. Mueller and the DOJ determined that any interference did not affect the actual voting.

Phyllis Softa
Member

And what page are you citing your statement? I have the full report at my fingertips.

I. Chin
Member

Phil.

What trips up liars is their lack of consistency.

Here you have the time and resources. to dig up obscure and erroneous factoids, yet now you can’t even research the simple release of a statement.

Here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/acting-attorney-general-and-secretary-homeland-security-submit-joint-report-impact-foreign

banstan
Member

ACTUALLY read it, then.

I. Chin
Member

Phil, those are just three suspects. There are hackers worldwide, like in Ukraine, the Baltic States, and the Middle East.

Look how easy it was to phish Podesta. (idiot) Perhaps you can tell Congress EXACTLY who hacked Hillary’s illegal server. Bring proof.

Phyllis Softa
Member

1. Hillary’s server was not illegal? What is the law that you are basing your assertion?

2. Page 4 Executive Summary–March, 2016 GRU began hacking.

3. There was an “attempt” to hack the Clinton server after Trump publicly requested it , but as report indicates it was unsuccessful.

I. Chin
Member

Don’t be stupid. Receiving classified emails on an unauthorized server is illegal. I’ll let you look up the statutes since you have so much free time.

banstan
Member

Did philly REALLY say hilliarly’s use of her private email account to send and receive classified information was NOT illegal? I’m pretty sure she did. Did Miss Know-it-all just show us she knows nothing?

I. Chin
Member

I believe she meant to skip the NOT part, unless she’s been training with Genital Contusion.

Leader of Armed Group Stopping Migrants at US-Mexico Border to Face Federal Charges

Trump Sues to Block Subpoena From Congress for Financial Information