"I would testify, I would do demonstrations, I'd give lectures, I'd give summations, or I'd do what I do best, I'd try the case. I'd love to try the case. I don't know if anybody would have the courage to give me the case, but if you give me the case, I will prosecute it as a racketeering case, which I kind of invented anyway. It was 30 years ago, but let's see if I can still do it."
As Kirschner points out, Rudy seems a little bit addled about what role he might have in the impeachment trial. The prosecutors are the House managers. He would be the defense lawyer. I don't think he's ever defended anyone in court.
He recently told New York magazine that he wanted to represent Trump in the Senate so he could cross-examine Democrats. “I’m great at it. It’s what I do best as a lawyer. That’s what I would be good at Oh, I would love it, I could rip — you know, I hate to sound like a ridiculously boastful lawyer, but cross-examining them would be, I don’t know, I could’ve done it when I was a second-year assistant U.S. attorney. They’re a bunch of clowns.”
Apparently, he really believes the impeachment trial is actually the president's prosecution of Joe Biden. Or something.
He is obviously still tight with the president, he was down in Florida over the holidays at all the big events. As far as we know he is still representing him and Trump can certainly have personal lawyers representing him in an impeachment trial. Bill Clinton did. So why not Rudy? He knows the story better than anyone.
Of course, he is actually a co-conspirator but these impeachment trials are their own weird thing. Why not have an accomplice who thinks someone else is on trial act as the lawyer? The Trump and Rudy show would be a ratings smash.
Published with permission of Digby's Hullabaloo
