Donald Trump Has Had a Lot of Terrible Lawyers. Rudy Giuliani Might Be the Worst.

How the president’s attorney created numerous ethical conflicts and legal problems for himself and his client.

Mario Ruiz/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

As a candidate, President Donald Trump boasted that he would hire “the best and most serious people.” But as impeachment bears down on his presidency, a lot of his problems may be because he has hired a very bad lawyer.

That man, of course, is Rudolph Giuliani. 

Trump brought Giuliani—a former federal prosecutor, New York City mayor, and Republican presidential candidate—onto his legal defense team in April 2018, when special counsel Robert Mueller was actively investigating contacts between Russian operatives and the Trump campaign. It’s unclear if Giuliani did any practical legal work related to that investigation, but he was a public face of the president’s defense, active on television, Twitter, and regularly texting back and forth with reporters.

But as recent revelations have made clear, Giuliani also took on a side portfolio: pushing for the ouster of the US ambassador in Ukraine and trying to get Ukraine to launch investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, as well as into a conspiracy theory about Ukrainian interference in the 2016 elections.

That project has proven a disaster for his client: A lawyer who sets out to defend a president and instead helps create the basis for his impeachment has not been an effective counsel. If that weren’t enough, here are three other ways Giuliani is not helping.

He keeps saying dumb things

Giuliani is failing his most basic task of publicly defending his client. With little evidence that Giuliani is carrying out actual legal work for the president, that public role would seem to be his one job. This week he attempted to do so in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, describing the July 25th phone call during which Trump asked Ukraine’s president to do him “a favor”:

Allegations of Burisma-Biden corruption weren’t even a major part of the conversation. The focus was on Ukrainian corruption broadly speaking and out of a five-page transcript Mr. Trump spent only six lines on Joe Biden.

The line quickly drew derision on Twitter. There is no word-count threshold for crimes or abuses of power.

He pals around with shady people

Whereas a good attorney will distance their client from criminal exposure, Giuliani has invited alleged criminals into Trump’s orbit. For help with his Ukraine mission, Giuliani turned to Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two Florida businessmen born in the former Soviet Union. Both men were charged last month by federal prosecutors in New York with funneling money from a Russian oligarch into US elections. Giuliani himself is reportedly under federal criminal investigation for his related activities in Ukraine. Prosecutors believe he may have been seeking to profit from a gas deal there brokered by Parnas and Fruman, and violated lobbying disclosure laws intended to prevent covert foreign influence by pushing for the ouster of the US Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch. Trump did ultimately remove the ambassador, who has become a key witness in the impeachment inquiry, publicly testifying on Friday.

“The mere fact that the president is continuing to retain a personal attorney who is at least reportedly under criminal investigation by the federal government is itself a pretty stunning and unique set of circumstances,” says John Bies, an attorney at the watchdog group American Oversight, pointing to reports this week that the federal probe into Giuliani may also include breaches of campaign finance and conspiracy laws. 

He’s a walking, growing conflict of interest

The legal mess that Giuliani has gotten himself—and his client—into leads to perhaps the most important way that Giuliani is failing as a lawyer.

Giuliani has created an ethically compromised situation. At this point, it might be more legally advantageous for Giuliani to maintain Trump as a client than it is for Trump to keep Giuliani as an attorney. That the opposite of how it’s supposed to be.

“He can’t be the star witness and the lawyer in the same case,” says Laurie Levinson, a criminal law expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. “Most people don’t have a lawyer representing them in a case when their lawyer also has counsel in the same case.” 

But this is precisely the hangup Giuliani has put Trump in, and it puts Giuliani in a position where he might be tempted to protect himself by throwing his client under the bus. The lobbying disclosure laws that prosecutors believe Giuliani may have broken contain an exception for legal work. While the Wall Street Journal reported Friday that US prosecutors are examining whether Giuliani was seeking business deals in Ukraine, it is in his interest to portray his work in the country as entirely on behalf of the president’s defense—a claim he has reiterated.

 

But this stance is unhelpful to Trump. As George Conway, a Republican anti-Trump lawyer, has pointed out, this tweet is actually very bad for the president as he faces impeachment. The case against Trump is that he used the powers of his office to advance his own personal interests—a textbook definition of abuse of power. Trump, in response, claims he was simply furthering America foreign policy and rooting out Ukrainian corruption. For Giuliani, Trump’s defense attorney, to insist all the work pushing for investigations was actually in service of his client’s defense undercuts the president’s claims of having been acting on behalf of the national interest. 

“This tweet by itself establishes that [Trump] committed an impeachable offense,” Conway wrote, retweeting Giuliani. “To say that Giuliani’s and Trump’s pursuit of ‘Ukrainian…corruption’ was ‘done solely’ to protect Trump’s interests establishes that Trump was not acting for the country.”

“You’re supposed to zealously advance your client’s interests,” says Bies, warning that is harder for an attorney to do once their interests diverge from the client’s.

Giuliani “also has an incentive to reveal things that might be covered by the duty of confidentiality,” said Ken White, a former prosecutor, while predicting how Giuliani’s “severe conflict of interest” might harm his client in an appearance on the podcast All the President’s Lawyers.

The legal profession is supposed to guard people against unscrupulous lawyers through its bar associations’ professional accreditation process. While warning he’s not personally an expert on when a lawyer’s conflicts of interest risk formal sanction, Bies says “at minimum there are significant questions about whether or not he has comported himself consistent with his bar obligations. And a bar counselor should consider that question seriously.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT.

We have a considerable $390,000 gap in our online fundraising budget that we have to close by June 30. There is no wiggle room, we've already cut everything we can, and we urgently need more readers to pitch in—especially from this specific blurb you're reading right now.

We'll also be quite transparent and level-headed with you about this.

In "News Never Pays," our fearless CEO, Monika Bauerlein, connects the dots on several concerning media trends that, taken together, expose the fallacy behind the tragic state of journalism right now: That the marketplace will take care of providing the free and independent press citizens in a democracy need, and the Next New Thing to invest millions in will fix the problem. Bottom line: Journalism that serves the people needs the support of the people. That's the Next New Thing.

And it's what MoJo and our community of readers have been doing for 47 years now.

But staying afloat is harder than ever.

In "This Is Not a Crisis. It's The New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, why this moment is particularly urgent, and how we can best communicate that without screaming OMG PLEASE HELP over and over. We also touch on our history and how our nonprofit model makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there: Letting us go deep, focus on underreported beats, and bring unique perspectives to the day's news.

You're here for reporting like that, not fundraising, but one cannot exist without the other, and it's vitally important that we hit our intimidating $390,000 number in online donations by June 30.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. It's going to be a nail-biter, and we really need to see donations from this specific ask coming in strong if we're going to get there.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT.

We have a considerable $390,000 gap in our online fundraising budget that we have to close by June 30. There is no wiggle room, we've already cut everything we can, and we urgently need more readers to pitch in—especially from this specific blurb you're reading right now.

We'll also be quite transparent and level-headed with you about this.

In "News Never Pays," our fearless CEO, Monika Bauerlein, connects the dots on several concerning media trends that, taken together, expose the fallacy behind the tragic state of journalism right now: That the marketplace will take care of providing the free and independent press citizens in a democracy need, and the Next New Thing to invest millions in will fix the problem. Bottom line: Journalism that serves the people needs the support of the people. That's the Next New Thing.

And it's what MoJo and our community of readers have been doing for 47 years now.

But staying afloat is harder than ever.

In "This Is Not a Crisis. It's The New Normal," we explain, as matter-of-factly as we can, what exactly our finances look like, why this moment is particularly urgent, and how we can best communicate that without screaming OMG PLEASE HELP over and over. We also touch on our history and how our nonprofit model makes Mother Jones different than most of the news out there: Letting us go deep, focus on underreported beats, and bring unique perspectives to the day's news.

You're here for reporting like that, not fundraising, but one cannot exist without the other, and it's vitally important that we hit our intimidating $390,000 number in online donations by June 30.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. It's going to be a nail-biter, and we really need to see donations from this specific ask coming in strong if we're going to get there.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate