Former Prosecutors Break Down Giuliani's Legal Problems Over Whistleblower Complaint
Lawyers said the complaint laid out troubling allegations that could lead to criminal probes of bribery and extortion and potential disciplinary action against Giuliani.
September 30, 2019 at 12:31 PM
7 minute read
Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor turned personal attorney to President Donald Trump, could face possible criminal and ethical exposure following the release of a whistleblower complaint, which described him as a "central figure" in alleged efforts to have the Ukrainian government interfere in the 2020 U.S. election, attorneys said last week.
Former federal prosecutors said the complaint, spurred by Trump's July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, laid out troubling allegations that could lead to criminal probes of bribery and extortion and potential disciplinary action against Giuliani.
On Monday, media outlets reported that House committees had subpoenaed Giuliani for documents related to Ukraine as they press ahead with an impeachment inquiry announced in the wake of the whistleblower complaint.
Giuliani, known for his pugnacious style and fierce defense of the president, last week called the whistleblower's account "total nonsense" and strongly rebuffed any allegations of wrongdoing in numerous media appearances. He has maintained that he was acting at the behest of Trump and the State Department, and in one interview held up his phone to suggest he had kept call logs to back up his claims.
Jaimie Nawaday, a former prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, said Giuliani's proximity to the president and State Department officials "doesn't offer him any cover" should prosecutors decide to open an investigation for aiding and abetting and conspiracy to commit bribery and extortion based on the whistleblower's allegations.
While Justice Department policy holds that Trump cannot be indicted while in office, Giuliani is a private citizen and has no such protections, she said.
"There's already talk of criminal exposure for Rudy Giuliani," said Nawaday, a partner with Kelley Drye & Warren. "And there are a lot more facts that are about to come out."
Others, however, were less sure of the likelihood that a U.S. attorney's office would choose to look into the matter. Thomas Kenniff, founding partner of Raiser & Kenniff, said that without evidence of an explicit quid pro quo, the actions described in the whistleblower complaint would not rise to that level.
"I don't think that there's a clear reading that says Trump is offering or withholding a benefit," he said.
Charles Ross, a partner with Mintz & Gold, called Giuliani's alleged behavior "egregious," but said it was not clear that prosecutors would be willing to authorize the resources necessary to launch a criminal investigation. While it was possible, the diplomatic overlays of the case, combined with existing DOJ policy, would make it difficult to ultimately bring conspiracy charges, he said.
"For prosecutors to look at this would be a real stretch," Ross said in an interview.
Still, there was an emerging consensus among the attorneys that Giuliani was vulnerable to potential disciplinary action for possibly running afoul of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct.
Ross and Nawaday both said the public allegations were enough to support the filing of a complaint with an attorney grievance committee, which are appointed by the appellate divisions of the state Supreme Court.
"I don't know that it would rise to the level of extortion," Ross said. "But I think Rudy is exposed to ethical claims."
The issue of standing does not apply to those lodging ethical complaints against lawyers, and anyone who suspects wrongdoing is allowed to avail themselves of the process. A grievance committee could also choose to launch its own sua sponte review based on information that is already publicly available.
In New York, fraud or misrepresentations by attorneys, even in their personal capacities, would qualify as violations of ethics rules, said Richard Maltz of Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz.
"The problem is that we don't know what their thinking is on whether it's sufficient misconduct to warrant the beginning of an investigation," Maltz said.
Any ethics investigation would likely include depositions and document requests, and the accused would be given a chance to respond.
Ultimately, though, it would be up to the committee's chief counsel to decide whether to prosecute the complaint. Were the process to move forward, the appellate division would assign a neutral referee to make factual findings and recommendations to the appellate division, which would make the final decision on public disciplinary measures.
In New York, attorneys can be censured, suspended for a period of up to five years or disbarred for up to seven years. There is no permanent disbarment in the state.
Giuliani's case will likely be compounded by public statements he's made in the following the whistleblower's disclosure.
In the complaint, an anonymous whistleblower from the U.S. intelligence community alleged that Trump had pressured Zelensky to investigate political rival Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, after the two had discussed military aid to Ukraine. According to a summary of the call, Trump encouraged Zelensky to discuss the matter with Giuliani, who the president said "very much knows what's happening."
According to the complaint, Giuliani was in touch with Ukrainian officials in the months leading up to the July phone call, and had traveled to Madrid in August to meet with Zelensky adviser Andriy Yermak as a "direct follow-up" to Trump's conversation with Zelensky.
The whistleblower also cited private statements from U.S. officials, who said they were "deeply concerned by what they viewed as Mr. Giuliani's circumvention of national security decision-making processes to engage with Ukrainian officials and relay messages back and forth between Kyiv and the president."
Trump has denied the existence of a quid pro quo or threatening to withhold aid if Ukraine did not open an investigation into the Bidens.
Giuliani, meanwhile, said in a fiery interview with The Atlantic on Sept. 26 that the State Department had specifically asked for his help, shouting: "If they were so concerned about my activities, why did they ask for my help? Why did they send me a bunch of friendly text messages reaching out for my help, thanking me for my help?"
Attempts to reach Giuliani for comment Sept. 27 were unsuccessful. An assistant initially said he would be available for a phone interview in the afternoon, but multiple calls and texts went unreturned.
Some congressional Republicans on Sept. 27 expressed frustration with the former mayor, as a formal impeachment inquiry got underway in the House. According to reporting by Politico, Sen. John Kennedy, R-Louisiana, said Giuliani was "wild as a March hare," and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, told reporters: "I'm not sure he's helping the president by being on TV every 15 minutes."
But Nawaday said Sept. 27 that the ramifications of Giuliani's freewheeling media appearances could be more than political.
"The more he goes on TV, and talks about this, the more he imperils himself," she said, noting his tendency to implicate the State Department in interviews. "At this point, it's really hard to understand what he's thinking. It raises so many more questions and points to so many more people who were involved as well."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDeluge of Trump-Leery Government Lawyers Join Job Market, Setting Up Free-for-All for Law Firm, In-House Openings
4 minute readThe Lawyers Picked (So Far) by Trump for Key Roles in His Second Administration
5 minute readTrump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means for Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
Trending Stories
- 1High Verdicts and Venue Rule Land Pa. Courts on Top of 'Judicial Hellhole' List
- 2Austin Appeals Court Rejects Free Speech Defense in Attorney's $2.9M Disgorgement Suit
- 3Home Improvement App Thumbtack Hires Ex-SmileDirectClub Legal Chief
- 4After Fining Investment Firms Billions for Lost Text Messages, Regulators Turn Scrutiny to Audio Recordings
- 5Baker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250