President Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani re-emerged on Friday to defend his client from the impending final report from Special Counsel Robert Mueller by citing a Wikipedia entry. Seriously.
In yet another effort to discredit the Steele dossier, some of which has been verified, Giuliani took to Twitter and used a Wikipedia excerpt as proof that the dossier is “phony.”
Since 2009 Steele has not been to Russia, or visited any former Soviet states and in 2012, an Orbis informant quoted an FSB-agent describing him as an “enemy of Mother Russia”.[1]
— Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) March 22, 2019
The below excerpt from Wikipedia, if true, is another indication that the Steele Dossier about Russia is a phony work of political opposition research. Comey never bothered to check when Steele was last in Russia. So where was it written and who wrote it? We demand answers!
— Rudy Giuliani (@RudyGiuliani) March 22, 2019
The problem is that anyone can edit a Wikipedia entry, which means it can’t be used as a source and certainly could not be cited in a court of law.
Twitter users responded to Giuliani by mocking him and fact-checking him.
You do know everyone has access to update Wikipedia, dumbass.
— Tony Posnanski (@tonyposnanski) March 22, 2019
Very cool report! What grade are you in
— Patrick Monahan (@pattymo) March 22, 2019
“from Wikipedia, if true” is a hell of a line from a lawyer
— Billy Dee (@RealSillyOwl) March 22, 2019
BREAKING NEWS: Legal writing professors across the country frantically e-mail students to remind them of the obvious that they should not do things like this.
— lawprofblawg (@lawprofblawg) March 22, 2019
You cited Wikipedia… how have you not been disbarred?
— Travis Akers (@travisakers) March 22, 2019
You realize Paul Singer initiated the dossier? A mega donor Republican that owns Free Beacon. You guys always leave that out. He hired Fusion GPS
— Rhonda Harbison (@rhonda_harbison) March 22, 2019
This excerpt from Wikipedia, if true, is another indication that Rudy Giuliani has a head made of wilted cabbage. pic.twitter.com/O4pFiePSmG
— Dennis DiClaudio (@dennisdiclaudio) March 22, 2019
“Your honor, I’d like to submit the following into evidence: this excerpt from Wikipedia, if true”
Grade A lawyering, Rudolph.
— Billy Dee (@RealSillyOwl) March 22, 2019
1. «Wikipedia, if true»?
2. You are simultaneously arguing that «Hillary colluded with Russia» and that the dossier can not be true because Steele was «an enemy of Mother Russia»?
3. Steele ran the MI6 Russia desk from 2006 to 2009.
4. MI6 is an ally.
5. Russia is an adversary.— Morten Øverbye (@morten) March 22, 2019
Rudy, I don’t allow the use of Wikipedia as a research source in the college classes I teach. You really should know better. FAIL.
— Elizabeth (@emcconnell96) March 22, 2019
Trump has been harping on about the Steele dossier for weeks now, whining in particularly about the late-Senator John McCain obtaining it and giving it to the FBI.
Now he and Giuliani have been reduced to citing Wikipedia as a defense. They must really be desperate if they are resorting to that route.
Featured Image: Screenshot
