From your cited article and others I remember, Giuliani's defense is
to squirt ink like a squid and flee to say "things were moving so quickly, I had no choice but to present items as facts in court, before I investigated them". I'm no expert, but I feel a parallel here with Trump ordering his lawyers to lie on the stand for him w.r.t. Mar-a-Lago. @
cubby already knows my, erm, "mild irritation" with the idea that I could order my lawyer to lie for me and we both get away with it. The issue here is, Giuliani is basically citing Some Guy On Twitter and blaming a faceless, anonymous nobody.
This is not the escape plan he wants it to be. Because it means he presented falsehoods as if they were facts, not only without checking on them first, but without even citing a
client.
Giuliani never had anything to back any of his claims and the only question is "is ignorance an excuse?" If Giuliani is allowed to make such baseless claims in court and escape any kind of consequences, what's to stop, oh I don't know,
me from suing him based on a bunch of stuff y'all said?
Especially the parody stuff?